FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Brexit - how will we know it's worked?
Brexit - how will we know it's worked?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How indeed no matter what happens all good things will have nothing to do with Brexit and all bad things will be because of Brexit. But hey that,s life. "..  ..spot on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How indeed no matter what happens all good things will have nothing to do with Brexit and all bad things will be because of Brexit. But hey that,s life. "or maybe reverse the statement. But hey thats life lol which ever way it goes nobody would admit they were wrong.they will spend half their lives on here arguing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria?" Everyone deported who was not born in this country. Complete shutdown on immigration Economy at a standstill through staff shortages Islam banned Nigel Farage appointed God | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? Everyone deported who was not born in this country. Complete shutdown on immigration Economy at a standstill through staff shortages Islam banned Nigel Farage appointed God" 20% of the way there already then! 
Come on Brexiters, help us out here please! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria?" How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. " I think there is a chance of that happening when the hypocrisy of the Leave position is acknowledged so that we can all actually take a pragmatic view of the way forwards. For example. Brexiters want to leave as a means of controlling immigration and yet insist that the UK economy will grow outside of the EU. All economics aside, how can this be possible? It is a complete contradiction because the economy can't grow without people to fuel it. Another contradiction is that the UK is going to be a champion of free trade to the world whilst turning its back on the free trade arrangement that it already has with its closest neighbours. Notwithstanding the fact that a free trade deal with India and China (as examples) would devastate low tech industry in the U.K. So, before the more thoughtful and considerate amongst the population get coerced into supporting the revolution, they perhaps need to understand the logic behind some fairly obvious contradictions that already exist despite being preparing to leave for the last seven months. There is no leadership in this country and intelligent people as a rule will not follow a dogged ideology just to pacify the revolutionaries who have a cause in their life, but no plan to effect it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Neither brexiter or remainer will know for decades if ever. Its a value judgement based on subjective opinions.Also you have to factor in too many variables over the next decade unconnected to brexit." . Fine points indeed young man.... Something I've noticed is the most shall we say passionate lot on both sides seem to be aged between 35 and 55 not quite young enough to not give a shit and not quite old enough to not give a shit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When remainers climb out of their prams..pick up their toy's..get back in their prams and start accepting democracy." So, I take it you don't have a clue then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. " So what you're saying is this: We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so. Is that a reasonable summation of the picture? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. So what you're saying is this: We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so. Is that a reasonable summation of the picture?" Like most remainers you try and twist things what is good for me may not be good for you. You asked how will we know if it is a success I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see. Success comes in many forms so tell me what success is to you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. So what you're saying is this: We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so. Is that a reasonable summation of the picture? Like most remainers you try and twist things what is good for me may not be good for you. You asked how will we know if it is a success I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see. Success comes in many forms so tell me what success is to you?" OK, you said "How can anyone know", I said "We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so." Where have I twisted that? If it's not what you meant perhaps you should be more clear. You now say "I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see" which seems to agree. What success is to me doesn't seem especially relevant, as I've made abundantly clear many times, I believe Brexit to be a disaster. But I'm trying to get an understanding of the Brexit point of view by asking here what success would be and in another thread what the timescale would be. Simple questions, I would think it reasonable to expect that people who voted leave what know what they think success would look like. So why take cheap shots at a perfectly reasonable question? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Neither brexiter or remainer will know for decades if ever. Its a value judgement based on subjective opinions.Also you have to factor in too many variables over the next decade unconnected to brexit." So we voted leave with no idea what we wanted? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. So what you're saying is this: We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so. Is that a reasonable summation of the picture? Like most remainers you try and twist things what is good for me may not be good for you. You asked how will we know if it is a success I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see. Success comes in many forms so tell me what success is to you? OK, you said "How can anyone know", I said "We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so." Where have I twisted that? If it's not what you meant perhaps you should be more clear. You now say "I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see" which seems to agree. What success is to me doesn't seem especially relevant, as I've made abundantly clear many times, I believe Brexit to be a disaster. But I'm trying to get an understanding of the Brexit point of view by asking here what success would be and in another thread what the timescale would be. Simple questions, I would think it reasonable to expect that people who voted leave what know what they think success would look like. So why take cheap shots at a perfectly reasonable question? " You did,nt ask what we hope to achieve you asked how will we know it has worked. 2 very different questions that's how you twist things. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. So what you're saying is this: We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so. Is that a reasonable summation of the picture? Like most remainers you try and twist things what is good for me may not be good for you. You asked how will we know if it is a success I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see. Success comes in many forms so tell me what success is to you? OK, you said "How can anyone know", I said "We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so." Where have I twisted that? If it's not what you meant perhaps you should be more clear. You now say "I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see" which seems to agree. What success is to me doesn't seem especially relevant, as I've made abundantly clear many times, I believe Brexit to be a disaster. But I'm trying to get an understanding of the Brexit point of view by asking here what success would be and in another thread what the timescale would be. Simple questions, I would think it reasonable to expect that people who voted leave what know what they think success would look like. So why take cheap shots at a perfectly reasonable question? You did,nt ask what we hope to achieve you asked how will we know it has worked. 2 very different questions that's how you twist things." Good grief, is that what you're reduced to? OK, you're right, happy? If that is what you nean by 'twist' gods help us all! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. So what you're saying is this: We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so. Is that a reasonable summation of the picture? Like most remainers you try and twist things what is good for me may not be good for you. You asked how will we know if it is a success I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see. Success comes in many forms so tell me what success is to you? OK, you said "How can anyone know", I said "We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so." Where have I twisted that? If it's not what you meant perhaps you should be more clear. You now say "I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see" which seems to agree. What success is to me doesn't seem especially relevant, as I've made abundantly clear many times, I believe Brexit to be a disaster. But I'm trying to get an understanding of the Brexit point of view by asking here what success would be and in another thread what the timescale would be. Simple questions, I would think it reasonable to expect that people who voted leave what know what they think success would look like. So why take cheap shots at a perfectly reasonable question? You did,nt ask what we hope to achieve you asked how will we know it has worked. 2 very different questions that's how you twist things." They are two parts of the same process. There is no point in doing something if you have no targets to aim for. It's this kind of rational that makes the 'less dedicated' remainers reluctant to get on board with brexit. You must have targets and objectives to attract people, and you must use these to examine how successful the idea and process was. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? Everyone deported who was not born in this country. Complete shutdown on immigration Economy at a standstill through staff shortages Islam banned Nigel Farage appointed God 20% of the way there already then!
Come on Brexiters, help us out here please!"Feeding time for trolls has passed.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Neither brexiter or remainer will know for decades if ever. Its a value judgement based on subjective opinions.Also you have to factor in too many variables over the next decade unconnected to brexit. So we voted leave with no idea what we wanted?" Some had no idea ,they just wanted change for the sake of it.I think other forces will eclipse brexit over time.Economic and political upheavals are inevitable over the next decade. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In its simplest form the main objective is to make our 'rulers' more accountable. If a government brings out a policy like say the poll tax that the people object to, they can elect another party/government to remove that policy. Now if the EU comes up with a policy like the poll tax or the Euro or Schengen or whatever and our government at the time agrees to it and it is implemented but then the people decide that it isn't working or they don't like it, how do they remove it? They can't, they/we are fucked" You Seem to have a very modest objective.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In its simplest form the main objective is to make our 'rulers' more accountable. If a government brings out a policy like say the poll tax that the people object to, they can elect another party/government to remove that policy. Now if the EU comes up with a policy like the poll tax or the Euro or Schengen or whatever and our government at the time agrees to it and it is implemented but then the people decide that it isn't working or they don't like it, how do they remove it? They can't, they/we are fucked" Considering that there has just been a referendum about our relationship with the EU and other countries have had and will have similar exercises, how exactly is anyone fucked? The EU is far more accountable d mocraticslly than the UK but you can't see that because your agenda is blinkered. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In its simplest form the main objective is to make our 'rulers' more accountable. If a government brings out a policy like say the poll tax that the people object to, they can elect another party/government to remove that policy. Now if the EU comes up with a policy like the poll tax or the Euro or Schengen or whatever and our government at the time agrees to it and it is implemented but then the people decide that it isn't working or they don't like it, how do they remove it? They can't, they/we are fucked Considering that there has just been a referendum about our relationship with the EU and other countries have had and will have similar exercises, how exactly is anyone fucked? The EU is far more accountable d mocraticslly than the UK but you can't see that because your agenda is blinkered." thank you. It takes a referendum to leave as the only way of changing anything | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing?" Umm... by the usual democratic process? You know, the elected MEPs we send there. Kind of like what we do here in the UK with our elected MPs. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How indeed no matter what happens all good things will have nothing to do with Brexit and all bad things will be because of Brexit. But hey that,s life. .. ..spot on." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? Umm... by the usual democratic process? You know, the elected MEPs we send there. Kind of like what we do here in the UK with our elected MPs. But it's run by unelected dictators like Juncker and his advisors, sorry I meant money sucking unelected cronies -Matt" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Perhaps we should hack back the original question - as realistically it will take at least 8-10 years to see if brexit is a success or failure by any measure. (unless of course leaving is a truly cataclysmic failure or raging success in which case 4 years in it might be fairly clear) Or if the average working class to lower middle class person just gets pissed off more as Westminster continues to shit on them and living standards decline and nothing truly significant happens. More accurately we'll be able to tell success vs failure when we can compare variables of living quality, wages, job quality and education options from population samples of those born in: EU member generation, EU member-brexit generation, and post Brexit generation. That will all take a lot of time, so most of the focus will be on the changes in living standards between the EU member generation and Brexit generation - at least for the next decade or two. That said, there are issues which will dwarf Brexit in scales of it's impact. Such as the automation of jobs - whereby AI and robotics will make most un-specialised workers obsolete. And realistically given the rates of tech advancement, there wont be the need for all those unemployed people to be put into programming and robotics, as it is highly likely someone will create programming which can order a machine to repair another machine. Ironically, those who saw brexit as a chance to save their jobs by reducing the amount of low skill immigration into the country - which is a respectable desire, are the ones who will loose out in the long run anyway unless they commit to retraining. The loss of low skill jobs is inevitable. So I've gone way off....so let me clarify, there is no point in asking what defines a successful brexit at the moment, we'll know for certain in several years if it is, or is not, or if when we do leave the country falls into an economic crisis. However, it is worth asking dedicated leavers, what are the actual objectives of leaving? Other than just leave. Are we looking to reduce immigration to just those with work permits, or can people from other countries study here too - if so can they work and study after. How do we handle trade deals? China and India have both said that trading with them will require us to relax how strict we are with student visa's from their nations - basically they have said they want us to allow their students to stay a while after their studies. Indian PM Modi has already told Mrs May that a free trade deal with his nation will include some element of free movement. So, what are the specific objectives?" The EU has not delivered any improvements to Living standards in the U.K., as they keep far more of our money than receive, unlike Romania and the other eastern shit holes | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The EU has not delivered any improvements to Living standards in the U.K., as they keep far more of our money than receive, unlike Romania and the other eastern shit holes" It is incredibly sad that after 40 years of close European ties from the EEC and its evolution into the EU of which the UK has always been a highly respected partner that we can see (and hear) opinions like you have just stated that are so fundamentally wrong, in so many ways that it is embarrassing. This is not about you BTW, far too many people hold the same views. Firstly, not that our living standards have anything to do with the EU but let's say they did. You are old enough to remember life in the UK prior to our EEC/EU Membership in the early 1970's when this country was known as the sick man of Europe. The UK has massively benefited from our ties with Europe and so has everyone that lives in this country be it from deregulation of air fares, to deregulate trading agreements to environmental benefits and not least the benefit of the complete ease and freedom to travel. That said, your point about living standards has nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with our own national governments but to to say there has been no improvements since the 1970's is not even close to a factual statement. The financial statement is hardly a surprise in as much as if people think that the EU is responsible for living standards and accuse the EU of not improving them despite living standards bing immeasurably improved since the 1970's, it is no surprise that the payment of EU fees is viewed from a purely one dimensional aspect. EU Membership adds a multitude of differently dimensional benefits to the whole landscape of the United Kingdom, not least in the ability of our national government to collect greater taxes becaus of its ability to trade unfettered with almost 500,000,000, as well as all of the other personal, commercial and corporate benefits. The fact is hat you are annoyed because Britain benefits do much and has such a vibrant economy and therefore pays more is demonstrative of an unfortunate ignorance that far too many have in this country. Fear not though, we are leaving and those who voted to leave and who's one dimensional view of the world carried, will soon get their wishes as the revolution comes to pass. I hope you all enjoy the ride | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. " Quite the opposite. If those that voted BREXIT really love their country then ditch the BREXIT plan and the totally unnecessary risks involved to peoples livelihoods, financial security and jobs, and join those of us who really love our country and continue to make it one of the most successful, dynamic and resourceful countries not only in the EU but the world. BREXITers, if they really love their country, have to start asking themselves what is more important to them. Sticking 'one up' to some imagined elite or the wealth and prosperity of their country and the people living in it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In its simplest form the main objective is to make our 'rulers' more accountable. If a government brings out a policy like say the poll tax that the people object to, they can elect another party/government to remove that policy. Now if the EU comes up with a policy like the poll tax or the Euro or Schengen or whatever and our government at the time agrees to it and it is implemented but then the people decide that it isn't working or they don't like it, how do they remove it? They can't, they/we are fucked" See that's just not true; if the EU came up with something that the UK didn't like, all that had to happen was for the UK to veto it. End . UK politicians and government have always been accountable; unfortunately the UK population never held them to account; And more importantly, UK MPs seldom held the government to account. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. So what you're saying is this: We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so. Is that a reasonable summation of the picture? Like most remainers you try and twist things what is good for me may not be good for you. You asked how will we know if it is a success I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see. Success comes in many forms so tell me what success is to you? OK, you said "How can anyone know", I said "We should leave the EU but we don't know what we hope to achieve by doing so." Where have I twisted that? If it's not what you meant perhaps you should be more clear. You now say "I don't know like you I,ll have to wait and see" which seems to agree. What success is to me doesn't seem especially relevant, as I've made abundantly clear many times, I believe Brexit to be a disaster. But I'm trying to get an understanding of the Brexit point of view by asking here what success would be and in another thread what the timescale would be. Simple questions, I would think it reasonable to expect that people who voted leave what know what they think success would look like. So why take cheap shots at a perfectly reasonable question? You did,nt ask what we hope to achieve you asked how will we know it has worked. 2 very different questions that's how you twist things." Feel free to answer either question or both then. If you can. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing?" The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. " the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries?" Do just remind me what the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament do and what functions they fulfil. What does the Commission do too? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" How can anyone know when remainers will just say that would have been better if we had stayed in the EU no matter what happens. Right now the whole country needs to get together and support Brexit as long the EU can see we as a country are divided we have no chance of getting a good deal, so if the remainers REALLY want the country to succeed accept the referendum result and get behide your country. " OK. So what is Brexit and what am I supporting? Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support?" Every political party publishes a manifesto prior to every general election. They tell you what a political party will do if they get into power. It is easy for anyone to read them, if you do not know what policies and plans you are supporting that says a lot about you. However neither the leave or remain camps published any manifesto, the remain camp can claim that remaining was the whole plan, the leave camp did and do not have that option. I for one want to know what 52% of those who voted voted for. I have been waiting 7 months to learn and still have no idea! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support? Every political party publishes a manifesto prior to every general election. They tell you what a political party will do if they get into power. It is easy for anyone to read them, if you do not know what policies and plans you are supporting that says a lot about you. However neither the leave or remain camps published any manifesto, the remain camp can claim that remaining was the whole plan, the leave camp did and do not have that option. I for one want to know what 52% of those who voted voted for. I have been waiting 7 months to learn and still have no idea!" The main thing is,you had a vote. You live in a democracy,the majority rules,democracy won,your side lost. So the first thing you have to know is,accept the democratic vote. Whinging losers,are just so sad,and pathetic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support? Every political party publishes a manifesto prior to every general election. They tell you what a political party will do if they get into power. It is easy for anyone to read them, if you do not know what policies and plans you are supporting that says a lot about you. However neither the leave or remain camps published any manifesto, the remain camp can claim that remaining was the whole plan, the leave camp did and do not have that option. I for one want to know what 52% of those who voted voted for. I have been waiting 7 months to learn and still have no idea! The main thing is,you had a vote. You live in a democracy,the majority rules,democracy won,your side lost. So the first thing you have to know is,accept the democratic vote. Whinging losers,are just so sad,and pathetic. " So you are saying it doesn't matter if you know what it is you are voting for, just vote? And you somehow think that is democracy? Very strange. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Next question to the Brexit lobby: How will we know Brexit has worked? " I'm sure that you'll be the first to tell us how bad it's been from whichever one of the other 27 states of utopia that you decide to move to. It's going to take years and decades before we see where our country stands in the world. I'll be dead but until then, I'm accepting the vote and going to work to make a success of this country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The main thing is,you had a vote. You live in a democracy,the majority rules,democracy won,your side lost. So the first thing you have to know is,accept the democratic vote. Whinging losers,are just so sad,and pathetic. " Again, the vote was: Remain in the EU Leave the EU WE ARE LEAVING. I UNDERSTAND. Nobody knows any information than that and it is arrogant to suggest that they know what that vote implies with regard to what form leaving the EU takes. Please let me know if Norway and Switzerland are in the EU. Please let me know what their relationship with the EU is. Please, now, tell me what "leave the EU" means. Please have the courtesy not to call people names and also that those who voted remain believe that was the best outcome for themselves and the UK. Please also have the courtesy to accept that everyone has every right to debate and fight for the version of leave that they feel is in the best interests of the UK. That is democracy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support? Every political party publishes a manifesto prior to every general election. They tell you what a political party will do if they get into power. It is easy for anyone to read them, if you do not know what policies and plans you are supporting that says a lot about you. However neither the leave or remain camps published any manifesto, the remain camp can claim that remaining was the whole plan, the leave camp did and do not have that option. I for one want to know what 52% of those who voted voted for. I have been waiting 7 months to learn and still have no idea! The main thing is,you had a vote. You live in a democracy,the majority rules,democracy won,your side lost. So the first thing you have to know is,accept the democratic vote. Whinging losers,are just so sad,and pathetic. So you are saying it doesn't matter if you know what it is you are voting for, just vote? And you somehow think that is democracy? Very strange. -Matt" It is all irrelevant now as the vote was seven months ago so who cares . Sometimes in life you can spend too much time analysing data which is historic in any event . The performance of the Stock Exchange ( adjusted for external events ) and low or no immigration will be a good enough measure for me . A strongly performing stock exchange means a buoyant economy which in turn means that most people will be better off . The taxes collected will fund the less well off if that is considered necessary. Low or no immigration means that we have put our efforts into utilising the existing work force in the UK in the most efficient manner possible . Relying on immigration is only a short term fix. Luckily we have many world leading technology companies and automation will mean a reduction in the necessity for unskilled labour . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Low or no immigration means that we have put our efforts into utilising the existing work force in the UK in the most efficient manner possible . Relying on immigration is only a short term fix." You do know that there were nearly 300,000 non EU, non refugee legal immigrants to the UK last year? I take it you also know that the net EU figure was about 30,000 because nearly 300,000 Brits went to live in other EU countries.
So good luck with your zero or near zero immigration. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Low or no immigration means that we have put our efforts into utilising the existing work force in the UK in the most efficient manner possible . Relying on immigration is only a short term fix. You do know that there were nearly 300,000 non EU, non refugee legal immigrants to the UK last year? I take it you also know that the net EU figure was about 30,000 because nearly 300,000 Brits went to live in other EU countries.
So good luck with your zero or near zero immigration."And he's going to get one hell of a shock when the UK end up inevitably relaxing visa requirements to India, China, and the like as part of the trade deals we start forging with them. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Low or no immigration means that we have put our efforts into utilising the existing work force in the UK in the most efficient manner possible . Relying on immigration is only a short term fix. You do know that there were nearly 300,000 non EU, non refugee legal immigrants to the UK last year? I take it you also know that the net EU figure was about 30,000 because nearly 300,000 Brits went to live in other EU countries.
So good luck with your zero or near zero immigration.
And he's going to get one hell of a shock when the UK end up inevitably relaxing visa requirements to India, China, and the like as part of the trade deals we start forging with them.
-Matt"Why would anyone get a shock if we have a long term planning process in place in order to become self sufficient . You might be shocked but that does not apply to everyone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries?" I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission does act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate.This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Low or no immigration means that we have put our efforts into utilising the existing work force in the UK in the most efficient manner possible . Relying on immigration is only a short term fix. You do know that there were nearly 300,000 non EU, non refugee legal immigrants to the UK last year? I take it you also know that the net EU figure was about 30,000 because nearly 300,000 Brits went to live in other EU countries.
So good luck with your zero or near zero immigration."dont be spoiling his la la land utopian dream with facts now.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support? Every political party publishes a manifesto prior to every general election. They tell you what a political party will do if they get into power. It is easy for anyone to read them, if you do not know what policies and plans you are supporting that says a lot about you. However neither the leave or remain camps published any manifesto, the remain camp can claim that remaining was the whole plan, the leave camp did and do not have that option. I for one want to know what 52% of those who voted voted for. I have been waiting 7 months to learn and still have no idea! The main thing is,you had a vote. You live in a democracy,the majority rules,democracy won,your side lost. So the first thing you have to know is,accept the democratic vote. Whinging losers,are just so sad,and pathetic. " It's not a football match. It's not game over when the whistle blows. In fact it's not a game where one side wins and the other side looses. The reality is is that we either all win or we all loose. If you seriously think that those who believe that leaving the EU is bad for Britain should not put their argument forward simply because the other side won a vote then you simply don't understand what democracy really is. It also shows an incredible level of hypocrisy as leavers have been winging and moaning for 41 years since the first referendum back in 1975. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission does act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate.This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country." oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do  . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Low or no immigration means that we have put our efforts into utilising the existing work force in the UK in the most efficient manner possible . Relying on immigration is only a short term fix. You do know that there were nearly 300,000 non EU, non refugee legal immigrants to the UK last year? I take it you also know that the net EU figure was about 30,000 because nearly 300,000 Brits went to live in other EU countries.
So good luck with your zero or near zero immigration.
And he's going to get one hell of a shock when the UK end up inevitably relaxing visa requirements to India, China, and the like as part of the trade deals we start forging with them.
-Matt Why would anyone get a shock if we have a long term planning process in place in order to become self sufficient . You might be shocked but that does not apply to everyone. "*whoosh* -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"When remainers climb out of their prams..pick up their toy's..get back in their prams and start accepting democracy." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good? Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?" That's not how it works; Individual countries propose new ideas for the EU, via their representatives on the council of ministers; If those ideas are acceptable, then they are passed to the commission to draw up the proposed laws. Those are then debated, amended, eventually approved by MEPs; Then individual governments are invited to approve ( or otherwise ) through their own national process. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good? Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU? That's not how it works; Individual countries propose new ideas for the EU, via their representatives on the council of ministers; If those ideas are acceptable, then they are passed to the commission to draw up the proposed laws. Those are then debated, amended, eventually approved by MEPs; Then individual governments are invited to approve ( or otherwise ) through their own national process. " but what happens if a government no longer approves? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If this is the state of political debate in this country then I'm not surprised it's broken. Excepting a few (reasoned) posts, shame on the lot of you; miserable, short-sighted fools. "You might as well argue about what colour to paint this 8-sided wheel you're making. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission does act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate.This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?"Sorry, bloody auto text. The first line of my reply was meant to read 'The EU doesn't act as a cabinet government'. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission does act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate.This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?"The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there not to be a mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument about the people of the UK have decided they don't want is simply supposition. But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all. With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else which purports to be democratic, have to execute their unbiasedly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there not to be a mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument about the people of the UK have decided they don't want is simply supposition. But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all. With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else which purports to be democratic, have to execute their unbiasedly." Just want to say that this is a very, very good post which is not only detailed, but it also encapsulates more of the contradictions of the Brexit position. Brits can of course be impartial as civil servants but not those pesky untrustworthy foreigners | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission does act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate.This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?
The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there not to be a mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument about the people of the UK have decided they don't want is simply supposition.
But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all.
With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else which purports to be democratic, have to execute their unbiasedly."oh dear | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission doesn't act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate. This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?
The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there to be no mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally know that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument what 'people of the UK have decided they don't want' is simply supposition.
But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all.
With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else, which purports to be democratic, have to execute their duties unbiasedly.
oh dear "Que? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission doesn't act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate. This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?
The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there to be no mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally know that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument what 'people of the UK have decided they don't want' is simply supposition.
But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all.
With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else, which purports to be democratic, have to execute their duties unbiasedly.
oh dear
Que?"entiendes nada | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission doesn't act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate. This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?
The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there to be no mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally know that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument what 'people of the UK have decided they don't want' is simply supposition.
But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all.
With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else, which purports to be democratic, have to execute their duties unbiasedly.
oh dear
Que?
entiendes nada"I think the correct phrase you're looking for might be "no te entiendo nada" or even "No sé nada". Better still a combination of them both with a final conclusion: "No sé nada, no entiendo nada, no soy nada" ;-) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission doesn't act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate. This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?
The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there to be no mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally know that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument what 'people of the UK have decided they don't want' is simply supposition.
But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all.
With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else, which purports to be democratic, have to execute their duties unbiasedly.
oh dear
Que?
entiendes nada
I think the correct phrase you're looking for might be "no te entiendo nada" or even "No sé nada". Better still a combination of them both with a final conclusion:
"No sé nada, no entiendo nada, no soy nada"
;-)
"took you a while to look that up. I speak it fluently thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Come on, anybody? How do we change the government of the EU if we don't like what they are doing? The EU doesn't have a government because it's not a sovereign state. It's governance is ultimately controlled by the democratically elected governments of its member states. There are legal procedures that any member state can take to leave the EURO zone, the Schengen agreement, the EU its self (article 50) and various other parts of the EU, EFTA, EEA and customs area. How well any of theses leave mechanism works remains to be found out but they are there. Still waiting to hear from any BREITer what a successful BREXIT is actually meant to look like and still waiting to hear from any BREXITer just what exactly leaving the EU is meant to achieve. And just saying 'taking back control' really doesn't tell us anything. the EU Commission acts as a cabinet government with 1 member from each state. Each member has to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. So it doesn't matter who the people/governments put in there their hands are tied aren't they? And you seriously think this is a good thing for individual countries? I'm often left wondering with you whether you're deliberately spreading information that you know to false or whether you're just a victim of the false information that someone else told you and you're simply passing on what you believe to be true. Either way what you say about the EU commission is simply not true. The EU commission doesn't act as a cabinet government. Its nearest equivalent would actually be the civil service heads of governmental departments. The members of the commission do not have to swear an oath to protect the interests of the EU above the interests of their state. They do take an oath pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate. This basically means they have to act impartially and is the minimum that we would expect from our own civil service. The democratic accountability of the EU lies within the council of ministers and the European Parliament. It does lie in the European Commission any more than democratic accountability lies within the civil service in this country. pledging to respect the treaties and to be completely independent in carrying out their duties during their mandate oh, so the other day they didn't have a government but now they do . And by taking that oath to respect the treaties of the EU it can mean that at times if circumstances change those treaties take precedence over things that might disadvantage their own countries, no?
The commission ALONE is responsible for drawing up new laws and legislation etc and then the council and parliament get to vote on it. So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?
Now the question I asked was how if having approved legislation a country later decides that that legislation is not working for them, how do they get out of it? Take free movement, which the people of the UK have decided they don't want. Can they elect new commissioners and enough MEP's who are willing to carry out their wishes and change legislation or is the only option to leave the EU?
The referendum vote was not about whether we should increase or decrease immigration from the EU into the UK. It was about whether we should remain in the EU or not. Even if most of those who voted leave did so in order to reduce immigration from the EU, with such a small majority voting for leave it would only have taken 1 in 50 of them to have voted leave for some other reason for there to be no mandates to reduce immigration from the EU. So, unless you can put your hand on your heart and say that you personally know that every single person who voted leave did so because they wanted to reduce immigration from the EU, your argument what 'people of the UK have decided they don't want' is simply supposition.
But, that aside, if we want to change the rules of the EU, as with any organisation, we have to persuade the other members of the organisation that the changes are beneficial to the organisation. We've done this many times in the 40+ years that we have been members of the EU/EC/EEC. The two biggest examples of this are the creation of the Single Market and enlargement of EU into Eastern Europe. Both of those where British ideas that the British government pioneered through the EU (incidentally they were both ideas originally put forward by Margaret Thatcher, hardly a liberal, leftwing, lovey in anyone's book). It's called international cooperation. I know it's a difficult concept for some right wing isolationist to get their heads around but it's the way most of the world works these days. You get change by cooperating with your partners and working with them for the mutual benefit of all.
With regard to your comments on commissioners. It is surly only right that members of the commission are unbiased in executing the duties of the job they have been given to do, in just the same way as British Civil Servants are unbiased in executing the duties of their job. It would be totally unacceptable and unworkable for a British Civil Servant to always side with Labour or Conservative and it would be even more unacceptable and unworkable for German commissioners to always side with Germany, Spanish Commissioners to always side with Spain etc; regardless of the merits of any suggestions put forward. Civil Servants, whether in the EU, the UK, or anywhere else, which purports to be democratic, have to execute their duties unbiasedly.
oh dear
Que?
entiendes nada
I think the correct phrase you're looking for might be "no te entiendo nada" or even "No sé nada". Better still a combination of them both with a final conclusion:
"No sé nada, no entiendo nada, no soy nada"
;-)
took you a while to look that up. I speak it fluently thanks"Of course I looked it up, although I did already know thar nada was nothing. I don't doubt your intelligence, in fact it's clear to me that you're definitely way above the average level, especially on theses BREXIT threads. However even intelligent people get things wrong sometimes and do really stupid things. Trust me on that, I know from my own personal experience. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"285,000 in 95,000 out Net immigration 190,000. . Sourced from full facts Com. . With this disclaimer. . The numbers are uncertain These figures have a large margin for error because they’re mainly based on surveys of passengers at airports. Net migration from the rest of the EU in any one year could usually be around 28,000 more or less than the estimates. That means that small changes in immigration from one period to the next might not actually represent what’s really happening." Nice disclaimer, however I'll accept audited the government numbers over a site who asks people at airports what they are doing entering or leaving the UK. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria? Everyone deported who was not born in this country. Complete shutdown on immigration Economy at a standstill through staff shortages Islam banned Nigel Farage appointed God" Does this mean communion will be 2 pints of lager and a packet of crisps? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The EU has not delivered any improvements to Living standards in the U.K., as they keep far more of our money than receive, unlike Romania and the other eastern shit holes" So you think that the only benefit of joining any organisation is if they give you more money than they pay you? No other benefits from increased trade, common regulations and laws, coordinated research? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""... So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?" No good at all and Commission members are appointed (not elected) after being recommended by each member state e.g. pro-EU, mortgage and passport fiddling dross like Mandelson. Britain has had three recessions since 1975 (not including the one we were in when we joined) as MEMBERS of the corrupt EC/EEC/EU. And as the ECB continues to print 80Bn EU-face-saving Euros in QE per month (since March 2015!) I'll reverse the question and ask after forty years when will we know when the EU has worked? " EU Commisioners are the appointees of member states. The sovereign powers. Any legislation that they propose has to be passed by elected MEPs and the Ministers of sovereign states in the Council. What's to rant about with that? Anything they come up with is only passed by people whom we have voted for. If you don't like who they are then tough. I don't like our current government who didn't have a policy on leaving the EU in their manifesto nor said anything about introducing more grammar schools or increasing A&E waiting times. So you are essentially saying that because membership of the EU has not prevented recession in the UK (just like everywhere else) and is persuing the same QE policy as the UK has it's a failure and hasn't helped the UK economy in any way? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
""... So basically the commission (government) are elected/put in place every 5 years with no manifesto and neither you nor I will know what there plans will be. How can that be good?" No good at all and Commission members are appointed (not elected) after being recommended by each member state e.g. pro-EU, mortgage and passport fiddling dross like Mandelson. Britain has had three recessions since 1975 (not including the one we were in when we joined) as MEMBERS of the corrupt EC/EEC/EU. And as the ECB continues to print 80Bn EU-face-saving Euros in QE per month (since March 2015!) I'll reverse the question and ask after forty years when will we know when the EU has worked? EU Commisioners are the appointees of member states. The sovereign powers. Any legislation that they propose has to be passed by elected MEPs and the Ministers of sovereign states in the Council. What's to rant about with that? Anything they come up with is only passed by people whom we have voted for. If you don't like who they are then tough. I don't like our current government who didn't have a policy on leaving the EU in their manifesto nor said anything about introducing more grammar schools or increasing A&E waiting times. So you are essentially saying that because membership of the EU has not prevented recession in the UK (just like everywhere else) and is persuing the same QE policy as the UK has it's a failure and hasn't helped the UK economy in any way?" has it fuck. I'd like you to explain how? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" has it fuck. I'd like you to explain how?" I don't think that the expletive was strictly necessary. Do you? Explain what? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" has it fuck. I'd like you to explain how? I don't think that the expletive was strictly necessary. Do you? Explain what?" sorry, I was just exasperated. How the EU has helped the UK economy? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" sorry, I was just exasperated. How the EU has helped the UK economy?" I appreciate that. I made a few suggestions in my post above the one you replied to. Bear in mind that we will have to replicate existing EU bureaucracy and structures and regulation to police our own trade agreements. Cost unknown. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but what happens if a government no longer approves?" For completeness, here's what the EU thinks happens in the creation of laws: "The Commission has the right of initiative to propose laws for adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU (national ministers). In most cases, the Commission makes proposals to meet its obligations under the EU treaties, or because another EU institution, country or stakeholder has asked it to act. From April 2012, EU citizens may also call on the Commission to propose laws (European Citizens’ Initiative). Before making proposals, the Commission consults widely so that stakeholders' views can be taken into account. In general, an assessment of the potential economic, social and environmental impact of a given piece of legislation act is published along with the proposal itself. The principles of subsidiarity and proportionality mean that the EU may legislate only where action is more effective at EU level than at national, regional or local level, and then no more than necessary to attain the agreed objectives. Once EU legislation has been adopted, the Commission ensures that it is correctly applied by the EU member countries." It is repealed in the same way. However, this is distinct from treaty law in which something like free movement was agreed. This is an agreement between the member states. It's what creates the EU igiants principles and the framework that it functions in. So, like any treaty changing it is rather a big deal. We did agree to it as a country though. The more we discuss this the more apparent it is that most of the things that people are annoyed about were negotiated or agreed to by our own government so I'm not sure how giving them more power improves our lot. Just a thought  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" sorry, I was just exasperated. How the EU has helped the UK economy? I appreciate that. I made a few suggestions in my post above the one you replied to. Bear in mind that we will have to replicate existing EU bureaucracy and structures and regulation to police our own trade agreements. Cost unknown." If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back" If you like. It isn't possible to argue with "belief". That's why we are where we are I guess. Go hum  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" sorry, I was just exasperated. How the EU has helped the UK economy? I appreciate that. I made a few suggestions in my post above the one you replied to. Bear in mind that we will have to replicate existing EU bureaucracy and structures and regulation to police our own trade agreements. Cost unknown. If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back" You really need to back that belief up with either some facts or logical reasoning. For example I believe that the trade we do with Europe is higher than it would have been if we had not been in the EU/EC/EEC because generally, if you decrease tariffs and harmonise regulations and make it easier to move people and goods between different places, the level of economic activity and subsequent trade between them increases. That is what the EU has done so it's reasonable to believe, having taken the action required to increase trade within the EU, that the level of trade is higher than it would have been otherwise. There is also no reasonable reason to believe that are trade with the rest of world would be significantly higher than it currently is if we were outside the EU; unless we had made similar arrangements with some other countries as we currently have with the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back If you like. It isn't possible to argue with "belief". That's why we are where we are I guess. Go hum "What else do we have? About how things might have been? You can't tell me I'm wrong. What I can tell you for sure is that the EU is creating an economic disaster zone and leaving before the rest will give us an advantage when it collapses completely. But, carry on wearing the blinkers if it makes you feel better | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria?" It is being an independent nation again,not being answerable to a there courts etc,well it is or me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria?It is being an independent nation again,not being answerable to a there courts etc,well it is or me" We are and always have been an independent nation and "their" Courts as you call them would be unlikely to have any direct on you as a person if you lived to be 500 years old. Unlike the U.K. courts where we could relatively easily end up either being grateful for or being hauled into. The vision of success that I believe most Brexiters are looking for will sadly be a huge anti climax and particularly so if EU immigration is replaced by Asian immigration, austerity continues and the great expectations that so many have fail to materialise. I mean think about it... A stronger economy than we have today but with a reduced workforce to fuel it by restricting immigration. Champions of free trade to the far world and abandoning free trade with our closest neighbours. Reduced tax receipts, more NHS agony and a likely break up of the United Kingdom. Or not? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back If you like. It isn't possible to argue with "belief". That's why we are where we are I guess. Go hum
What else do we have? About how things might have been? You can't tell me I'm wrong.
What I can tell you for sure is that the EU is creating an economic disaster zone and leaving before the rest will give us an advantage when it collapses completely. But, carry on wearing the blinkers if it makes you feel better"Who's really wearing the blinkers here. If the EU does actually completely collapse it will be disaster for the UK whether we're actually in the EU or not. The EU is our largest trading partner and, even if drops by 10% as a direct result of BREXIT it will still be largest trading partner. If completely collapses that's going to lead to and even bigger loss of trade to an extent that would totally dwarf that already inflicted by BREXIT its self. And it wouldn't stop just at European trade. The EU is also the largest export market for most of the rest of the world to. A complete collapse of the EU would seriously effect every nation around the world that trades with the EU, leaving them all poorer and subsequently less able to afford our goods and services also. If you really believe that the EU is heading for complete collapse then surely, if you care about the people of your own country and their wealth, the only sensible thing to do is every thing you possibly can to avoid its collapsed and that can only be done from within the EU its self. Leaving the EU and hopping that if, or when, it finally collapses, it won't effect us is simply living in a fools paradise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"But surely, we must have some idea of how we'll know it has worked? I mean, come on, I'm no fan of Brexit but presumably some Brexiter knows when it will have worked? There must be some goals, some success criteria?It is being an independent nation again,not being answerable to a there courts etc,well it is or me" I don't know what country you live in but the country I live is already an independent nation, has been since 1066 and can't become one again because it already is one. I am not answerable to any foreign court, either in the EU or any other foreign country, except when I choose to spend time in those foreign countries. If you feel you are answerable to some EU or other foreign court maybe you could tell which court you feel you are answerable to and where, outside of the UK, this court sits? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back If you like. It isn't possible to argue with "belief". That's why we are where we are I guess. Go hum
What else do we have? About how things might have been? You can't tell me I'm wrong.
What I can tell you for sure is that the EU is creating an economic disaster zone and leaving before the rest will give us an advantage when it collapses completely. But, carry on wearing the blinkers if it makes you feel better"Who's really wearing the blinkers here. If the EU does actually completely collapse it will be a disaster for the UK whether we're actually in the EU or not. The EU is our largest trading partner and, even if trade drops by 10% as a direct result of BREXIT it, will still be largest our trading partner. If the EU did completely collapses that would lead to an even bigger loss of trade to an extent that would totally dwarf any already inflicted by BREXIT its self. And it wouldn't stop just at European trade. The EU is also the largest export market for most of the rest of the world to. A complete collapse of the EU would seriously effect every nation around the world that trades with the EU, leaving them all poorer and subsequently less able to afford our goods and services also. If you really believe that the EU is heading for complete collapse then surely, if you care about the people of your own country and their wealth, the only sensible thing to do is every thing you possibly can to avoid its collapsed and that can only be done from within the EU its self. Leaving the EU and hopping that if, or when, it finally collapses, it won't effect us is simply living in a fools paradise. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back If you like. It isn't possible to argue with "belief". That's why we are where we are I guess. Go hum
What else do we have? About how things might have been? You can't tell me I'm wrong.
What I can tell you for sure is that the EU is creating an economic disaster zone and leaving before the rest will give us an advantage when it collapses completely. But, carry on wearing the blinkers if it makes you feel better
Who's really wearing the blinkers here. If the EU does actually completely collapse it will be disaster for the UK whether we're actually in the EU or not. The EU is our largest trading partner and, even if drops by 10% as a direct result of BREXIT it will still be largest trading partner. If completely collapses that's going to lead to and even bigger loss of trade to an extent that would totally dwarf that already inflicted by BREXIT its self. And it wouldn't stop just at European trade. The EU is also the largest export market for most of the rest of the world to. A complete collapse of the EU would seriously effect every nation around the world that trades with the EU, leaving them all poorer and subsequently less able to afford our goods and services also. If you really believe that the EU is heading for complete collapse then surely, if you care about the people of your own country and their wealth, the only sensible thing to do is every thing you possibly can to avoid its collapsed and that can only be done from within the EU its self. Leaving the EU and hopping that if, or when, it finally collapses, it won't effect us is simply living in a fools paradise."what loss of trade thats already been inflicted by Brexit? there will be no fewer countries, no less people and no smaller market when the EU is gone, its just the name of a corrupt organisition its not Europe. You have fallen for the same rubbish you probably fell for before the referendum. Yes there will be some market upheaval and panic but that will soon settle down. Sometimes things need to be knocked down to be rebuilt properly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I am not answerable to any foreign court, either in the EU or any other foreign country, except when I choose to spend time in those foreign countries. If you feel you are answerable to some EU or other foreign court maybe you could tell which court you feel you are answerable to and where, outside of the UK, this court sits?" Actually we are answerable to US courts if any of our money passed through the USA or they believe we have done something that they don't like. Our (UK) government agreed to reduce the bar to extradition. Bloody EU. Why did they let us do that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" what loss of trade thats already been inflicted by Brexit? there will be no fewer countries, no less people and no smaller market when the EU is gone, its just the name of a corrupt organisition its not Europe. You have fallen for the same rubbish you probably fell for before the referendum. Yes there will be some market upheaval and panic but that will soon settle down. Sometimes things need to be knocked down to be rebuilt properly " Wow. Believe  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Next question to the Brexit lobby: How will we know Brexit has worked? " When a big red bus starts to tour the country with a damn great slogan painted on the side saying Brexit has worked. Unless I see that, I shant be convinced | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If the EU had never existed, would we have done any less trade with our European neighbours and would we have done more trade with the rest of the world? I believe the answers are no and yes, so the EU has held us back If you like. It isn't possible to argue with "belief". That's why we are where we are I guess. Go hum
What else do we have? About how things might have been? You can't tell me I'm wrong.
What I can tell you for sure is that the EU is creating an economic disaster zone and leaving before the rest will give us an advantage when it collapses completely. But, carry on wearing the blinkers if it makes you feel better
Who's really wearing the blinkers here. If the EU does actually completely collapse it will be a disaster for the UK whether we're actually in the EU or not. The EU is our largest trading partner and, even if trade drops by 10% as a direct result of BREXIT it, will still be our largest trading partner. If the EU completely collapses that's going to lead to and even bigger loss of trade to an extent that would totally dwarf that already inflicted by BREXIT its self. And it wouldn't stop just at European trade. The EU is also the largest export market for most of the rest of the world to. A complete collapse of the EU would seriously effect every nation around the world that trades with the EU, leaving them all poorer and subsequently less able to afford our goods and services also. If you really believe that the EU is heading for complete collapse then surely, if you care about the people of your own country and their wealth, the only sensible thing to do is every thing you possibly can to avoid its collapsed and that can only be done from within the EU its self. Leaving the EU and hopping that if, or when, it finally collapses, it won't effect us is simply living in a fools paradise.
what loss of trade thats already been inflicted by Brexit?
there will be no fewer countries, no less people and no smaller market when the EU is gone, its just the name of a corrupt organisation, its not Europe. You have fallen for the same rubbish you probably fell for before the referendum. Yes there will be some market upheaval and panic but that will soon settle down. Sometimes things need to be knocked down to be rebuilt properly "I have already clearly stated the reasoning as to why I believe that the EU has increased the levels of trade between its members. If you believe it hasn't then, rather than just saying you don't believe it has, why don't you tell us the reasoning behind your belief. Tell us how putting tariffs on trade, restricting the movement of goods, services, capital and people within the current EU/EFTA/EEA area is going to actually increase the levels of trade within that area. Then you go on to say that the EU is a corrupt organisation but give no examples of any corrupt activity. TBH it seems like you're the one that might have been fooled during the referendum because you just seem to recite the same old rubbish that BREXITers and leavers said during the referendum but when pushed to explain what you actually mean either say nothing, simply repeat what you already said or start off on another, usually unfounded, rant about something else that you 'believe' to be wrong with the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think that rather than worry about the out or in bit ! We should try to workout how WE are going to make it work ? Why does it look to a casual bystander that most of the ppl who fought for this to happen have spoke the words " oh fuck what do we do now ????" And left the problem at other people's feet ?? It's not going to take just one party to get this sorted but something that everyone needs input into ? I know it's not going to happen because people find it easier to criticise the ones that have been left with it ! And to give views on what they think ppl would like to hear isn't going to get us back to the great part of Britain ??" I certainly agree. Hence the question how do you incorporate the wishes of the 48% who voted to remain within the negotiating position. If their views are simply ignored then the country will permanently remain divided. That requires discussion and compromise. Shouting "Brexit means Brexit", "out means out", "stop whining", "get behind the UK", "stop talking the UK down" doesn't really help. Could we park that from now on? Pretty please
I've also asked this in other threads but could some of the leave supporters provide an idea of a scenario of leaving the EU that might work well for everyone? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The saying look before you leap comes to mind ? The thought of us being stand alone do as we please is great ! But I truest don't think anyone actually thought about the how ?? The arguement in both ways was good and very entertaining but don't believe that either lot knew what to do if either leave or stay had won ? Just wish intelligent ? People would think about the how's before the why's ??" I think that remain was the status quo and continuing to fight for and negotiate less waste and more responsiveness to the effects of individuals in the same way as is done now. Rather slowly. Leave is, well, leave. How and to what end I don't know and why is standing alone good? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The saying look before you leap comes to mind ? The thought of us being stand alone do as we please is great ! But I truest don't think anyone actually thought about the how ?? The arguement in both ways was good and very entertaining but don't believe that either lot knew what to do if either leave or stay had won ? Just wish intelligent ? People would think about the how's before the why's ?? I think that remain was the status quo and continuing to fight for and negotiate less waste and more responsiveness to the effects of individuals in the same way as is done now. Rather slowly. Leave is, well, leave. How and to what end I don't know and why is standing alone good?" Maybe direct that question to the people of the former USSR or Yugoslavia | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The saying look before you leap comes to mind ? The thought of us being stand alone do as we please is great ! But I truest don't think anyone actually thought about the how ?? The arguement in both ways was good and very entertaining but don't believe that either lot knew what to do if either leave or stay had won ? Just wish intelligent ? People would think about the how's before the why's ?? I think that remain was the status quo and continuing to fight for and negotiate less waste and more responsiveness to the effects of individuals in the same way as is done now. Rather slowly. Leave is, well, leave. How and to what end I don't know and why is standing alone good? Maybe direct that question to the people of the former USSR or Yugoslavia" You think Brexit will lead to war and ethnic cleansing, and you still voted for it?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The saying look before you leap comes to mind ? The thought of us being stand alone do as we please is great ! But I truest don't think anyone actually thought about the how ?? The arguement in both ways was good and very entertaining but don't believe that either lot knew what to do if either leave or stay had won ? Just wish intelligent ? People would think about the how's before the why's ?? I think that remain was the status quo and continuing to fight for and negotiate less waste and more responsiveness to the effects of individuals in the same way as is done now. Rather slowly. Leave is, well, leave. How and to what end I don't know and why is standing alone good? Maybe direct that question to the people of the former USSR or Yugoslavia You think Brexit will lead to war and ethnic cleansing, and you still voted for it? "That happenned while they were together | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You think Brexit will lead to war and ethnic cleansing, and you still voted for it?
That happenned while they were together "Ethnic cleansing and war in Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia occured after the collapse of Yugoslavia. Civil wars and ethnic cleansing in Russia occured post 1991 (after the fall of the Soviet Union and include wars in Abkhazia, Georgia, Transnistria, Ossetia, Dagestan, Tajikstan, Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine (amongst other places). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You think Brexit will lead to war and ethnic cleansing, and you still voted for it?
That happenned while they were together
Ethnic cleansing and war in Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia occured after the collapse of Yugoslavia. Civil wars and ethnic cleansing in Russia occured post 1991 (after the fall of the Soviet Union and include wars in Abkhazia, Georgia, Transnistria, Ossetia, Dagestan, Tajikstan, Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine (amongst other places)."but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You think Brexit will lead to war and ethnic cleansing, and you still voted for it?
That happenned while they were together
Ethnic cleansing and war in Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia occured after the collapse of Yugoslavia. Civil wars and ethnic cleansing in Russia occured post 1991 (after the fall of the Soviet Union and include wars in Abkhazia, Georgia, Transnistria, Ossetia, Dagestan, Tajikstan, Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine (amongst other places).
but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not?"No, they had wars and ethnic cleansing and war crimes. Why would you vote for that? What is wrong with you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You think Brexit will lead to war and ethnic cleansing, and you still voted for it?
That happenned while they were together
Ethnic cleansing and war in Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia occured after the collapse of Yugoslavia. Civil wars and ethnic cleansing in Russia occured post 1991 (after the fall of the Soviet Union and include wars in Abkhazia, Georgia, Transnistria, Ossetia, Dagestan, Tajikstan, Chechnya, Georgia and Ukraine (amongst other places).
but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not?"Are you asking (as an example) if Ukraine is more peaceful now than it was in the Soviet Union? Or if Dagestan, Georgia and Ossetia are good places to go or if the civil war that traumatised a generation in the former Yugoslavia is now forgotten and everyone just gets along hunky dory? War is traumatic and it embeds fear, loathing and hatered for years and years and years. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not?" The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? " They lived together perfectly well. As neighbours. Intermarriage. Capitalism didn't deliver quickly enough and guess what happened? Someone needed to be blamed so that someone else could get power... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day." there was always conflict there, so were they better off together or how they are now? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day. there was always conflict there, so were they better off together or how they are now?" Well lots of them are in mass graves. That's not what I want for the UK. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day. there was always conflict there, so were they better off together or how they are now? Well lots of them are in mass graves. That's not what I want for the UK." they are yes because of a well meant but failed experiment | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day. there was always conflict there, so were they better off together or how they are now? Well lots of them are in mass graves. That's not what I want for the UK. they are yes because of a well meant but failed experiment" And you think mass graves are an acceptable price for Brexit? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day. there was always conflict there, so were they better off together or how they are now? Well lots of them are in mass graves. That's not what I want for the UK. they are yes because of a well meant but failed experiment And you think mass graves are an acceptable price for Brexit?" So we are going to have civil war now ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day. there was always conflict there, so were they better off together or how they are now? Well lots of them are in mass graves. That's not what I want for the UK. they are yes because of a well meant but failed experiment And you think mass graves are an acceptable price for Brexit? So we are going to have civil war now ?" At least four Brexit posters on this forum have posted about "the need" for a civil war since June and when albeit a very small number of people start talking about it.... What happens next? What happens when the angry Brexiters utopian dream of a life outside the EU turns into a living nightmare? Who do they blame then? There is a significant portion of our society who are very angry and when their dream fails to materialise it won't mean their anger and rage will subside, it will be inflamed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" but the reason for those conflicts was that they didn't want to/couldn't live together and the blocs fell apart and escalated into war because of that. Are the regions more peaceful now that they are seperate countries or not? The blocs did not fall apart because the various regions couldn't live together. The blocs fell apart because President Tito died in Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union simply had its day. there was always conflict there, so were they better off together or how they are now?" I don't know about Yugoslavia, but there was no recorded conflicts within the Soviet Union. I could check but I think you are just making stuff up as you go along. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support? Every political party publishes a manifesto prior to every general election. They tell you what a political party will do if they get into power. It is easy for anyone to read them, if you do not know what policies and plans you are supporting that says a lot about you. However neither the leave or remain camps published any manifesto, the remain camp can claim that remaining was the whole plan, the leave camp did and do not have that option. I for one want to know what 52% of those who voted voted for. I have been waiting 7 months to learn and still have no idea! The main thing is,you had a vote. You live in a democracy,the majority rules,democracy won,your side lost. So the first thing you have to know is,accept the democratic vote. Whinging losers,are just so sad,and pathetic. So you are saying it doesn't matter if you know what it is you are voting for, just vote? And you somehow think that is democracy? Very strange. -Matt" No,Im Saying,we had a debate, before the vote, over quite a long period of time (I'm surprised you missed it) People then made a decision, Based upon on the information given during that debate, They were then asked to vote remain,or leave. The majority voted leave,so democratically leave won. That's what I think democracy is. Is that a very strange kind of democracy. Maybe you know of some other form of democracy. or maybe,like many other Remainers, you only support democracy, if you're side wins. . Ps even you must see how sad,pathetic,and undemocratic the remain voters appear. They lost the vote. now with their constant whinging, they're also losing all semblance of dignity. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Next question to the Brexit lobby: How will we know Brexit has worked? " If the Greek economy is stronger than the British economy then it's not working If the British economy is stronger than the German economy then it is working. In between it's a work in progress. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK tells us every few years tells us that they want the best for our country and we should get behind them. They have some policies and a plan which I can choose to support or not. What arw the policies or plans for me to support? Every political party publishes a manifesto prior to every general election. They tell you what a political party will do if they get into power. It is easy for anyone to read them, if you do not know what policies and plans you are supporting that says a lot about you. However neither the leave or remain camps published any manifesto, the remain camp can claim that remaining was the whole plan, the leave camp did and do not have that option. I for one want to know what 52% of those who voted voted for. I have been waiting 7 months to learn and still have no idea! The main thing is,you had a vote. You live in a democracy,the majority rules,democracy won,your side lost. So the first thing you have to know is,accept the democratic vote. Whinging losers,are just so sad,and pathetic. So you are saying it doesn't matter if you know what it is you are voting for, just vote? And you somehow think that is democracy? Very strange. -Matt No,Im Saying,we had a debate, before the vote, over quite a long period of time (I'm surprised you missed it) People then made a decision, Based upon on the information given during that debate, They were then asked to vote remain,or leave. The majority voted leave,so democratically leave won. That's what I think democracy is. Is that a very strange kind of democracy. Maybe you know of some other form of democracy. or maybe,like many other Remainers, you only support democracy, if you're side wins. . Ps even you must see how sad,pathetic,and undemocratic the remain voters appear. They lost the vote. now with their constant whinging, they're also losing all semblance of dignity. " And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit." What garbage | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage "
I'm afraid it's just another desperate Remainer,
grasping at straws. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage " Why garbage? Farage has said that he fears what people will do on the streets if they don't get Brexit, many others including posters on here have said the same. Brexiters want May alone to invoke A50 and abandon Parliamentary Sovereignty, Brexiters have publically labelled the judiciary as enemies of the people and want a civil service that toes a nominated political agenda. Which bit is garbage? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage Why garbage? Farage has said that he fears what people will do on the streets if they don't get Brexit, many others including posters on here have said the same. Brexiters want May alone to invoke A50 and abandon Parliamentary Sovereignty, Brexiters have publically labelled the judiciary as enemies of the people and want a civil service that toes a nominated political agenda. Which bit is garbage?" To start with you said farage FEARS what will happen on the street,thats just a tad different from calling for violence, and most brexit supporters wanted the civil service to put over a balanced view of consequences of brexit,do you remember the treasury reports pre vote and just what shit they have turned out to be, as for invoking art 50 I feel that parliament gave the people a right to vote by 6 to 1 and the PM and remain campaign told us they would honour the decision, so yes garbage | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Next question to the Brexit lobby: How will we know Brexit has worked? " well things went perfectly well before we joined the so called common market.it was meant to be all about trade not some stupid super state trying to tell us how this country should be run.yes we won the war but lost the peace.finally good old France and Germany have done us good and proper.something they tried for years and years.I blame Harold Wilson for dragging us in this shit.we were sold down the line by him.it was all lies back then.the vote back then dragged us in and those who voted not to join didn't bleat about it like today's remoaners.we accepted the result all Be it reluctantly .I've waited all these years to put it right.get out now why wait two years.your British be proud.they need us more than we nleavingl.hey my cucumber is not the right shape SO WHAT ( two finger job to Brussels). We are an island not some little annex for Europe to rule..the overpaid unelected rulers in Brussels needed someone to stand up to them .everyone should get behind leaving I'm not worried about leaving.wait till the euro currency collapses.its a case of when not if.Rule BRITANNIA. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage Why garbage? Farage has said that he fears what people will do on the streets if they don't get Brexit, many others including posters on here have said the same. Brexiters want May alone to invoke A50 and abandon Parliamentary Sovereignty, Brexiters have publically labelled the judiciary as enemies of the people and want a civil service that toes a nominated political agenda. Which bit is garbage?" everything that comes out of BRUSSELS that's what | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage Why garbage? Farage has said that he fears what people will do on the streets if they don't get Brexit, many others including posters on here have said the same. Brexiters want May alone to invoke A50 and abandon Parliamentary Sovereignty, Brexiters have publically labelled the judiciary as enemies of the people and want a civil service that toes a nominated political agenda. Which bit is garbage? To start with you said farage FEARS what will happen on the street,thats just a tad different from calling for violence, and most brexit supporters wanted the civil service to put over a balanced view of consequences of brexit,do you remember the treasury reports pre vote and just what shit they have turned out to be, as for invoking art 50 I feel that parliament gave the people a right to vote by 6 to 1 and the PM and remain campaign told us they would honour the decision, so yes garbage" Well, it is true for a small number of people. For the mainstream there certainly has been an implied threat of insurrection in the way that manipulative politicians blow on the embers and pretend that the fire had nothing to do with them. There's certainly been a willingness to denigrate the system that is apparently so important to them. A bit of hyperbole in the initial post though. Those who voted leave were promised everything though. So far nobody even knows what pig in the poke we've bought looks like. Whatever ludicrous scaremongering was employed we do know the current situation. However, reading a lot of the posts on the topic over the last few weeks I'm not sure that many people who voted leave did. That said, very few people will admit doubt now. There's too much invested in it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage Why garbage? Farage has said that he fears what people will do on the streets if they don't get Brexit, many others including posters on here have said the same. Brexiters want May alone to invoke A50 and abandon Parliamentary Sovereignty, Brexiters have publically labelled the judiciary as enemies of the people and want a civil service that toes a nominated political agenda. Which bit is garbage? To start with you said farage FEARS what will happen on the street,thats just a tad different from calling for violence, and most brexit supporters wanted the civil service to put over a balanced view of consequences of brexit,do you remember the treasury reports pre vote and just what shit they have turned out to be, as for invoking art 50 I feel that parliament gave the people a right to vote by 6 to 1 and the PM and remain campaign told us they would honour the decision, so yes garbage" 6Th Nov Farage said "Believe you me, if the people in this country think they're going to be cheated, they're going to be betrayed, then we will see political anger the likes of which none of us in our lifetimes have ever witnessed in this country" We have all seen riots in this country, but we haven't seen civil war, so it's clear to me what he is talking about. Also see above with CandM, out of all the places they could have picked, they picked the former Yugoslavia and the USSR. Places well know for wars, war crimes and ethnic cleansing, and suggesting those were worth it for 'independence'. Look at how the EU ambassador was hounded out of his job, for DOING his job. How many Brexiters were saying that he should be replaced by a Brexit supporter. That's not political neutrality is it? As mentioned above, British high court judges, upholding British laws in a British court (something that the Brexiters said they wanted) were labelled enemies of the people. Again, as mentioned above, Brexiters calling for the PM to unilaterally overturn acts of parliament. That would be the end of parliamentary sovereignty, and the creation of a dictatorship, with all the power concentrated in one person. If May had that power, whats to stop here repealing the fixed term parliaments act, and then staying in power forever? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" For the mainstream there certainly has been an implied threat of insurrection in the way that manipulative politicians blow on the embers and pretend that the fire had nothing to do with them. There's certainly been a willingness to denigrate the system that is apparently so important to them. A bit of hyperbole in the initial post though. Those who voted leave were promised everything though. So far nobody even knows what pig in the poke we've bought looks like. Whatever ludicrous scaremongering was employed we do know the current situation. However, reading a lot of the posts on the topic over the last few weeks I'm not sure that many people who voted leave did. That said, very few people will admit doubt now. There's too much invested in it." The vast majority of things that have happened so far have been good, even the pound dropping is good as long as it doesnt go too far as everyone acknowledges it was over valued. Yes its early days but we were told by the experts that day one would be the start of disaster so why would you now take note of their continued doom | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage Why garbage? Farage has said that he fears what people will do on the streets if they don't get Brexit, many others including posters on here have said the same. Brexiters want May alone to invoke A50 and abandon Parliamentary Sovereignty, Brexiters have publically labelled the judiciary as enemies of the people and want a civil service that toes a nominated political agenda. Which bit is garbage? To start with you said farage FEARS what will happen on the street,thats just a tad different from calling for violence, and most brexit supporters wanted the civil service to put over a balanced view of consequences of brexit,do you remember the treasury reports pre vote and just what shit they have turned out to be, as for invoking art 50 I feel that parliament gave the people a right to vote by 6 to 1 and the PM and remain campaign told us they would honour the decision, so yes garbage"
The Remainers have taken to distorting the facts,with half truths,and outright lies.
No no wait a minute,that was their whole campaign.
That should have read,continued to distort the facts,with half truths,and outright lies.
Tut tut | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Next question to the Brexit lobby: How will we know Brexit has worked? well things went perfectly well before we joined the so called common market.it was meant to be all about trade not some stupid super state trying to tell us how this country should be run.yes we won the war but lost the peace.finally good old France and Germany have done us good and proper.something they tried for years and years.I blame Harold Wilson for dragging us in this shit.we were sold down the line by him.it was all lies back then.the vote back then dragged us in and those who voted not to join didn't bleat about it like today's remoaners.we accepted the result all Be it reluctantly .I've waited all these years to put it right.get out now why wait two years.your British be proud.they need us more than we nleavingl.hey my cucumber is not the right shape SO WHAT ( two finger job to Brussels). We are an island not some little annex for Europe to rule..the overpaid unelected rulers in Brussels needed someone to stand up to them .everyone should get behind leaving I'm not worried about leaving.wait till the euro currency collapses.its a case of when not if.Rule BRITANNIA." Edward Heath took us into the Common Market....blaming Wilson is a little harsh wouldnt you say? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Every political party in the UK And Brexiters have called for violence and civil war, want to abandon parliamentary sovereignty, abandon an independent judiciary, abandon a professional and politically neutral civil service, based on 28% of the population voting for Brexit. What garbage Why garbage? Farage has said that he fears what people will do on the streets if they don't get Brexit, many others including posters on here have said the same. Brexiters want May alone to invoke A50 and abandon Parliamentary Sovereignty, Brexiters have publically labelled the judiciary as enemies of the people and want a civil service that toes a nominated political agenda. Which bit is garbage? To start with you said farage FEARS what will happen on the street,thats just a tad different from calling for violence, and most brexit supporters wanted the civil service to put over a balanced view of consequences of brexit,do you remember the treasury reports pre vote and just what shit they have turned out to be, as for invoking art 50 I feel that parliament gave the people a right to vote by 6 to 1 and the PM and remain campaign told us they would honour the decision, so yes garbage
The Remainers have taken to distorting the facts,with half truths,and outright lies.
No no wait a minute,that was their whole campaign.
That should have read,continued to distort the facts,with half truths,and outright lies.
Tut tut "Ha frigging ha.....i love this post truth world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why?" You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. " Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. " A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . " Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that it member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods buy even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU nay suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . " Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods but even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU may suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. With regard to light bulbs, they have similar rules in Australia, the US and most of the developed world so how will leaving the EU make any real change. And it's not an EU bureaucrat telling you what bulbs you can have, it's the elected EU parliament and democratically accountable Council of Ministers. But of course it serves your argument to say EU bureaucrat rather than sticking to the truth. On your final point about uninsured drivers being aloud to claim compensation, presumably from other motorists or people who have inflicted some loss or damage on them. I haven't heard of this one but this would simply bring the rest of the EU into line with what the current state of law is in the UK already. If you damage someone's property you are liable to pay them damages. Whether they're adequately insured, or even legally insured, is irrelevant to your liability. This is also true around most of the developed world, whether in the EU or not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why?" Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. We answer to the European Court of justice. The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. We answer to the European Court of justice. The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. " No. You really haven't. 1. How will making trade with the EU more expensive or complex make us wealthier? 2. What supranational court is a part of the EU, not just have "Europe" in the name? 3. How does the structure and function of EU bureaucrats differ from that of the UK civil service? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. We answer to the European Court of justice. The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. No. You really haven't. 1. How will making trade with the EU more expensive or complex make us wealthier? 2. What supranational court is a part of the EU, not just have "Europe" in the name? 3. How does the structure and function of EU bureaucrats differ from that of the UK civil service?" That's three completely different questions. Did you Remainers know nothing about the EU before you voted. Tut tut tut | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. We answer to the European Court of justice. The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. No. You really haven't. 1. How will making trade with the EU more expensive or complex make us wealthier? 2. What supranational court is a part of the EU, not just have "Europe" in the name? 3. How does the structure and function of EU bureaucrats differ from that of the UK civil service? That's three completely different questions. Did you Remainers know nothing about the EU before you voted. Tut tut tut " No, they are actually a very good summation of the three questions I've asked. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. " The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? " We answer to the European Court of justice. " I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? " The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. " Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. " I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. " I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? We answer to the European Court of justice. I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems." If you already know the answers to the questions what is the point of asking them ? Are you a personal friend of Teressa May and has she already advised you of her proposed policy ?. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If this is the state of political debate in this country then I'm not surprised it's broken. Excepting a few (reasoned) posts, shame on the lot of you; miserable, short-sighted fools. "Maybe people are working hard and can see what is happening around them. Not many people with valid points would resort to referring to those with whom they disagree as being short sighted fools . It might be that these short sighted fools have made decisions which are for the long term benefit of the country . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods but even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU may suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. With regard to light bulbs, they have similar rules in Australia, the US and most of the developed world so how will leaving the EU make any real change. And it's not an EU bureaucrat telling you what bulbs you can have, it's the elected EU parliament and democratically accountable Council of Ministers. But of course it serves your argument to say EU bureaucrat rather than sticking to the truth. On your final point about uninsured drivers being aloud to claim compensation, presumably from other motorists or people who have inflicted some loss or damage on them. I haven't heard of this one but this would simply bring the rest of the EU into line with what the current state of law is in the UK already. If you damage someone's property you are liable to pay them damages. Whether they're adequately insured, or even legally insured, is irrelevant to your liability. This is also true around most of the developed world, whether in the EU or not." I was surprised that you claim that after adjusting for currency movements , the stock market has stood still . However even if we were to accept this arguement , the collapse which those who supported project fear predicted simply has not happened . Most people will accept that the stock market has preformed very stongly since the referendum . Based on the assumption that share values are based on the future value of a company ( and not on what has happened histically ) the strong performance since Brexit indicates that businness is not undully concerned about leaving the EU out . Short term currency gains will have been discounted out when assessing future prospects . In any event brokers , financial journalists and fund managers crawl all over companies results and check their operating margins on a like for like basis . I do not see many of them advising to ignore the good news because it is simply down to currency gains . I subscibe to a number of specialist investment publications which analyse results on a company by company basis . Again they do not advise to ignore good news in the rise of most share prices . I am at a total loss to understand why any driver using an uninsured vehicle should be entitled to compensation (which has to be paid by insured drivers ) . On a simlistic basis , if your car is uminsured you should not be on the road . However , I guess that you may work in the legal profession and have a different view of uninsured drivers . The future outside the EU looks bright to me . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods but even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU may suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. With regard to light bulbs, they have similar rules in Australia, the US and most of the developed world so how will leaving the EU make any real change. And it's not an EU bureaucrat telling you what bulbs you can have, it's the elected EU parliament and democratically accountable Council of Ministers. But of course it serves your argument to say EU bureaucrat rather than sticking to the truth. On your final point about uninsured drivers being aloud to claim compensation, presumably from other motorists or people who have inflicted some loss or damage on them. I haven't heard of this one but this would simply bring the rest of the EU into line with what the current state of law is in the UK already. If you damage someone's property you are liable to pay them damages. Whether they're adequately insured, or even legally insured, is irrelevant to your liability. This is also true around most of the developed world, whether in the EU or not. I was surprised that you claim that after adjusting for currency movements , the stock market has stood still . However even if we were to accept this arguement , the collapse which those who supported project fear predicted simply has not happened . Most people will accept that the stock market has preformed very stongly since the referendum . Based on the assumption that share values are based on the future value of a company ( and not on what has happened histically ) the strong performance since Brexit indicates that businness is not undully concerned about leaving the EU out . Short term currency gains will have been discounted out when assessing future prospects . In any event brokers , financial journalists and fund managers crawl all over companies results and check their operating margins on a like for like basis . I do not see many of them advising to ignore the good news because it is simply down to currency gains . " I'm constantly surprised that some, otherwise intelligent and quite articulate people, aren't able to work out something as simple and straight forward as the dollar value of shares over a fixed time. But here's the numbers and the maths to help out. Prior to the referendum the FTSE index was around 6,000 and GBP(£) was around $1.45. Currently the FTSE index is around 7,300 and GBP(£) is around $1.20. To find out what 6,000 at 1.20 is the equivalent of at 1.45 the formula is: (6,000 * 1.45) / 1.20 Which gives 7,250. Pretty dam close to the 7300 the FTSE is actually trading at. " I subscibe to a number of specialist investment publications which analyse results on a company by company basis . Again they do not advise to ignore good news in the rise of most share prices . " We may well be reading the same investment publications. Investing in stocks is also probably the best hedge to make against the probable inflation that is likely to come as a result of the fall in value of GBP(£) and massive amounts of extra quantitive easing (printing money) being used to ward of the predicted economic down turn post BREXIT. " I am at a total loss to understand why any driver using an uninsured vehicle should be entitled to compensation (which has to be paid by insured drivers ) . On a simplistic basis , if your car is uninsured you should not be on the road ." The fact that someone may be breaking the law does not give you the right to either willfully or accidentally damage their property or them. You alone are responsible for your own actions and the consequences of those actions and, if your actions results in damage to someone else's property or person than you are, under current British law, liable. This is the law here in the UK now and I'd be pretty surprised to find it wasn't the law in most countries around the work, whether in the EU or not. " However , I guess that you may work in the legal profession and have a different view of uninsured drivers . " My personal view on uninsured drives isn't really relevant however, for the record, my personal view on uninsured drivers is that they are a scourge on society, often a danger to themselves and, more seriously, a danger to other, law abiding, road user. They should be pursued and prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. " The future outside the EU looks bright to me . " It's good to know you feel so positive about it. Maybe you can tell us all how making it harder to trade with our biggest, closest and richest trading partners is going to make our lives brighter because to many it looks like, at best, the future looks no brighter and at worst a lot duller? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods but even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU may suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. With regard to light bulbs, they have similar rules in Australia, the US and most of the developed world so how will leaving the EU make any real change. And it's not an EU bureaucrat telling you what bulbs you can have, it's the elected EU parliament and democratically accountable Council of Ministers. But of course it serves your argument to say EU bureaucrat rather than sticking to the truth. On your final point about uninsured drivers being aloud to claim compensation, presumably from other motorists or people who have inflicted some loss or damage on them. I haven't heard of this one but this would simply bring the rest of the EU into line with what the current state of law is in the UK already. If you damage someone's property you are liable to pay them damages. Whether they're adequately insured, or even legally insured, is irrelevant to your liability. This is also true around most of the developed world, whether in the EU or not. I was surprised that you claim that after adjusting for currency movements , the stock market has stood still . However even if we were to accept this arguement , the collapse which those who supported project fear predicted simply has not happened . Most people will accept that the stock market has preformed very stongly since the referendum . Based on the assumption that share values are based on the future value of a company ( and not on what has happened histically ) the strong performance since Brexit indicates that businness is not undully concerned about leaving the EU out . Short term currency gains will have been discounted out when assessing future prospects . In any event brokers , financial journalists and fund managers crawl all over companies results and check their operating margins on a like for like basis . I do not see many of them advising to ignore the good news because it is simply down to currency gains . I'm constantly surprised that some, otherwise intelligent and quite articulate people, aren't able to work out something as simple and straight forward as the dollar value of shares over a fixed time. But here's the numbers and the maths to help out. Prior to the referendum the FTSE index was around 6,000 and GBP(£) was around $1.45. Currently the FTSE index is around 7,300 and GBP(£) is around $1.20. To find out what 6,000 at 1.20 is the equivalent of at 1.45 the formula is: (6,000 * 1.45) / 1.20 Which gives 7,250. Pretty dam close to the 7300 the FTSE is actually trading at. I subscibe to a number of specialist investment publications which analyse results on a company by company basis . Again they do not advise to ignore good news in the rise of most share prices . We may well be reading the same investment publications. Investing in stocks is also probably the best hedge to make against the probable inflation that is likely to come as a result of the fall in value of GBP(£) and massive amounts of extra quantitive easing (printing money) being used to ward of the predicted economic down turn post BREXIT. I am at a total loss to understand why any driver using an uninsured vehicle should be entitled to compensation (which has to be paid by insured drivers ) . On a simplistic basis , if your car is uninsured you should not be on the road .The fact that someone may be breaking the law does not give you the right to either willfully or accidentally damage their property or them. You alone are responsible for your own actions and the consequences of those actions and, if your actions results in damage to someone else's property or person than you are, under current British law, liable. This is the law here in the UK now and I'd be pretty surprised to find it wasn't the law in most countries around the work, whether in the EU or not. However , I guess that you may work in the legal profession and have a different view of uninsured drivers . My personal view on uninsured drives isn't really relevant however, for the record, my personal view on uninsured drivers is that they are a scourge on society, often a danger to themselves and, more seriously, a danger to other, law abiding, road user. They should be pursued and prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. The future outside the EU looks bright to me . It's good to know you feel so positive about it. Maybe you can tell us all how making it harder to trade with our biggest, closest and richest trading partners is going to make our lives brighter because to many it looks like, at best, the future looks no brighter and at worst a lot duller?" You use the the word "many" I prefer Majority | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods but even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU may suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. With regard to light bulbs, they have similar rules in Australia, the US and most of the developed world so how will leaving the EU make any real change. And it's not an EU bureaucrat telling you what bulbs you can have, it's the elected EU parliament and democratically accountable Council of Ministers. But of course it serves your argument to say EU bureaucrat rather than sticking to the truth. On your final point about uninsured drivers being aloud to claim compensation, presumably from other motorists or people who have inflicted some loss or damage on them. I haven't heard of this one but this would simply bring the rest of the EU into line with what the current state of law is in the UK already. If you damage someone's property you are liable to pay them damages. Whether they're adequately insured, or even legally insured, is irrelevant to your liability. This is also true around most of the developed world, whether in the EU or not. I was surprised that you claim that after adjusting for currency movements , the stock market has stood still . However even if we were to accept this arguement , the collapse which those who supported project fear predicted simply has not happened . Most people will accept that the stock market has preformed very stongly since the referendum . Based on the assumption that share values are based on the future value of a company ( and not on what has happened histically ) the strong performance since Brexit indicates that businness is not undully concerned about leaving the EU out . Short term currency gains will have been discounted out when assessing future prospects . In any event brokers , financial journalists and fund managers crawl all over companies results and check their operating margins on a like for like basis . I do not see many of them advising to ignore the good news because it is simply down to currency gains . I'm constantly surprised that some, otherwise intelligent and quite articulate people, aren't able to work out something as simple and straight forward as the dollar value of shares over a fixed time. But here's the numbers and the maths to help out. Prior to the referendum the FTSE index was around 6,000 and GBP(£) was around $1.45. Currently the FTSE index is around 7,300 and GBP(£) is around $1.20. To find out what 6,000 at 1.20 is the equivalent of at 1.45 the formula is: (6,000 * 1.45) / 1.20 Which gives 7,250. Pretty dam close to the 7300 the FTSE is actually trading at. I subscibe to a number of specialist investment publications which analyse results on a company by company basis . Again they do not advise to ignore good news in the rise of most share prices . We may well be reading the same investment publications. Investing in stocks is also probably the best hedge to make against the probable inflation that is likely to come as a result of the fall in value of GBP(£) and massive amounts of extra quantitive easing (printing money) being used to ward of the predicted economic down turn post BREXIT. I am at a total loss to understand why any driver using an uninsured vehicle should be entitled to compensation (which has to be paid by insured drivers ) . On a simplistic basis , if your car is uninsured you should not be on the road .The fact that someone may be breaking the law does not give you the right to either willfully or accidentally damage their property or them. You alone are responsible for your own actions and the consequences of those actions and, if your actions results in damage to someone else's property or person than you are, under current British law, liable. This is the law here in the UK now and I'd be pretty surprised to find it wasn't the law in most countries around the work, whether in the EU or not. However , I guess that you may work in the legal profession and have a different view of uninsured drivers . My personal view on uninsured drives isn't really relevant however, for the record, my personal view on uninsured drivers is that they are a scourge on society, often a danger to themselves and, more seriously, a danger to other, law abiding, road user. They should be pursued and prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. The future outside the EU looks bright to me . It's good to know you feel so positive about it. Maybe you can tell us all how making it harder to trade with our biggest, closest and richest trading partners is going to make our lives brighter because to many it looks like, at best, the future looks no brighter and at worst a lot duller?You use the the word "many" I prefer Majority " The "majority" voted for a worse future? Great. Well done. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods but even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU may suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. With regard to light bulbs, they have similar rules in Australia, the US and most of the developed world so how will leaving the EU make any real change. And it's not an EU bureaucrat telling you what bulbs you can have, it's the elected EU parliament and democratically accountable Council of Ministers. But of course it serves your argument to say EU bureaucrat rather than sticking to the truth. On your final point about uninsured drivers being aloud to claim compensation, presumably from other motorists or people who have inflicted some loss or damage on them. I haven't heard of this one but this would simply bring the rest of the EU into line with what the current state of law is in the UK already. If you damage someone's property you are liable to pay them damages. Whether they're adequately insured, or even legally insured, is irrelevant to your liability. This is also true around most of the developed world, whether in the EU or not. I was surprised that you claim that after adjusting for currency movements , the stock market has stood still . However even if we were to accept this arguement , the collapse which those who supported project fear predicted simply has not happened . Most people will accept that the stock market has preformed very stongly since the referendum . Based on the assumption that share values are based on the future value of a company ( and not on what has happened histically ) the strong performance since Brexit indicates that businness is not undully concerned about leaving the EU out . Short term currency gains will have been discounted out when assessing future prospects . In any event brokers , financial journalists and fund managers crawl all over companies results and check their operating margins on a like for like basis . I do not see many of them advising to ignore the good news because it is simply down to currency gains . I'm constantly surprised that some, otherwise intelligent and quite articulate people, aren't able to work out something as simple and straight forward as the dollar value of shares over a fixed time. But here's the numbers and the maths to help out. Prior to the referendum the FTSE index was around 6,000 and GBP(£) was around $1.45. Currently the FTSE index is around 7,300 and GBP(£) is around $1.20. To find out what 6,000 at 1.20 is the equivalent of at 1.45 the formula is: (6,000 * 1.45) / 1.20 Which gives 7,250. Pretty dam close to the 7300 the FTSE is actually trading at. I subscibe to a number of specialist investment publications which analyse results on a company by company basis . Again they do not advise to ignore good news in the rise of most share prices . We may well be reading the same investment publications. Investing in stocks is also probably the best hedge to make against the probable inflation that is likely to come as a result of the fall in value of GBP(£) and massive amounts of extra quantitive easing (printing money) being used to ward of the predicted economic down turn post BREXIT. I am at a total loss to understand why any driver using an uninsured vehicle should be entitled to compensation (which has to be paid by insured drivers ) . On a simplistic basis , if your car is uninsured you should not be on the road .The fact that someone may be breaking the law does not give you the right to either willfully or accidentally damage their property or them. You alone are responsible for your own actions and the consequences of those actions and, if your actions results in damage to someone else's property or person than you are, under current British law, liable. This is the law here in the UK now and I'd be pretty surprised to find it wasn't the law in most countries around the work, whether in the EU or not. However , I guess that you may work in the legal profession and have a different view of uninsured drivers . My personal view on uninsured drives isn't really relevant however, for the record, my personal view on uninsured drivers is that they are a scourge on society, often a danger to themselves and, more seriously, a danger to other, law abiding, road user. They should be pursued and prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. The future outside the EU looks bright to me . It's good to know you feel so positive about it. Maybe you can tell us all how making it harder to trade with our biggest, closest and richest trading partners is going to make our lives brighter because to many it looks like, at best, the future looks no brighter and at worst a lot duller?You use the the word "many" I prefer Majority The "majority" voted for a worse future? Great. Well done. "None of us Really know that ! I guess in 5 maybe 10 years we will , but people will still disagree even then ! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? You are quite correct. All of Primi Ninister Mays bluff and bluster is also pointless. There will be no effective negotiation with the EU and that means that we will be out of the Single Market. Indeed hard core Brexiters actually want this and accept that there will be a hit to the economy and job losses within firms who who work in EU tied commerce. They say that in war, there are always casualties. Still no reply to the questions raised by any BREXUTer. Seems like these, thought of themselves patriots, can't actually put a reasonable case for BREXIT. Push them to make their case and they run away and disappear. But then I guess if they had the balls to fight their case they wouldn't be running away from Europe, like a bunch of scared cowards, but would have backed their country up in making both Britain and Europa better like their parents, grand parents and great grand parents did over the last 100 years and more. And they seriously expect us all to unite with them while they try to turn Britain into an inward looking, bankrupt, back alley of country, devoid of democrat accountability and the rule of law, like some banana republic. On the bright side, at least we don't have to worry too much about them 'taking to the streets' and causing 'massive public insurrection' if they don't get their own way. They haven't even got the balls to stand up to the EU without quitting and running away, or even to make their case on this forum and answer simple questions. I can't see them having the balls to actually get off their arses and doing anything. A very simple answer , Member counties will still have to buy our goods and in any event all the duties ( if they are ever imposed ) will simply cancel out . ) . The German motor industry is dependent on us and will not want to see any steps taken which will damage trade relationships . Companies will just have to concentrate on the quality of their products and marketing strategy . This is what sells goods , not whether or not you are a member of the EU . The recent stong performance of the stock exchange would indicate that we have little to worry about . Luckily the EU is more dependent on us than we are on them . Currently the UK has one of the stongest performing economies . In any event its looks like the EU may be breaking up in any event , so we have made the wise decision to jump out of a sinking ship . ( and in the process save all the contibutions which we pay in ) I object to overpaid EU bureaucrats telling me what type of light bulbs t that I can buy or even worse having to pay extra utility charges because of irrelevant energy renewable policies . Why should I be deprived of the right to drive either a bus or lorry commercially because an overpaid bureaucrat says that a driver qualication card is necessary . The latest piece of bad news is that the EU is insisting on compensation being paid to uninsured motorists which will lead to an increase in insurance premiums . Nice try but you haven't actually answered any of the questions asked. To be clear, the question that you alluded to, was 'how will making it harder to trade with are closets, biggest and wealthiest trading partners actually increase levels of wealth and trade?' Your answer seems to be that member states will still have to buy our goods. They don't have to buy our goods but even if that were true it would simply leave us about the same as now, not better of. You then go on to say that the UK leaving the EU will be worse for Germany and the EU than it will be for the UK. How does that help. It doesn't make me any happier to know that Germany or any other country in the EU may suffer more than us. I'd rather neither we, Germany or the EU suffered. The stock market has risen in pound sterling but, if you concert those pounds back to dollars it's pretty much where it was. With regard to light bulbs, they have similar rules in Australia, the US and most of the developed world so how will leaving the EU make any real change. And it's not an EU bureaucrat telling you what bulbs you can have, it's the elected EU parliament and democratically accountable Council of Ministers. But of course it serves your argument to say EU bureaucrat rather than sticking to the truth. On your final point about uninsured drivers being aloud to claim compensation, presumably from other motorists or people who have inflicted some loss or damage on them. I haven't heard of this one but this would simply bring the rest of the EU into line with what the current state of law is in the UK already. If you damage someone's property you are liable to pay them damages. Whether they're adequately insured, or even legally insured, is irrelevant to your liability. This is also true around most of the developed world, whether in the EU or not. I was surprised that you claim that after adjusting for currency movements , the stock market has stood still . However even if we were to accept this arguement , the collapse which those who supported project fear predicted simply has not happened . Most people will accept that the stock market has preformed very stongly since the referendum . Based on the assumption that share values are based on the future value of a company ( and not on what has happened histically ) the strong performance since Brexit indicates that businness is not undully concerned about leaving the EU out . Short term currency gains will have been discounted out when assessing future prospects . In any event brokers , financial journalists and fund managers crawl all over companies results and check their operating margins on a like for like basis . I do not see many of them advising to ignore the good news because it is simply down to currency gains . I'm constantly surprised that some, otherwise intelligent and quite articulate people, aren't able to work out something as simple and straight forward as the dollar value of shares over a fixed time. But here's the numbers and the maths to help out. Prior to the referendum the FTSE index was around 6,000 and GBP(£) was around $1.45. Currently the FTSE index is around 7,300 and GBP(£) is around $1.20. To find out what 6,000 at 1.20 is the equivalent of at 1.45 the formula is: (6,000 * 1.45) / 1.20 Which gives 7,250. Pretty dam close to the 7300 the FTSE is actually trading at. I subscibe to a number of specialist investment publications which analyse results on a company by company basis . Again they do not advise to ignore good news in the rise of most share prices . We may well be reading the same investment publications. Investing in stocks is also probably the best hedge to make against the probable inflation that is likely to come as a result of the fall in value of GBP(£) and massive amounts of extra quantitive easing (printing money) being used to ward of the predicted economic down turn post BREXIT. I am at a total loss to understand why any driver using an uninsured vehicle should be entitled to compensation (which has to be paid by insured drivers ) . On a simplistic basis , if your car is uninsured you should not be on the road .The fact that someone may be breaking the law does not give you the right to either willfully or accidentally damage their property or them. You alone are responsible for your own actions and the consequences of those actions and, if your actions results in damage to someone else's property or person than you are, under current British law, liable. This is the law here in the UK now and I'd be pretty surprised to find it wasn't the law in most countries around the work, whether in the EU or not. However , I guess that you may work in the legal profession and have a different view of uninsured drivers . My personal view on uninsured drives isn't really relevant however, for the record, my personal view on uninsured drivers is that they are a scourge on society, often a danger to themselves and, more seriously, a danger to other, law abiding, road user. They should be pursued and prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. The future outside the EU looks bright to me . It's good to know you feel so positive about it. Maybe you can tell us all how making it harder to trade with our biggest, closest and richest trading partners is going to make our lives brighter because to many it looks like, at best, the future looks no brighter and at worst a lot duller?You use the the word "many" I prefer Majority The "majority" voted for a worse future? Great. Well done.
None of us Really know that !
I guess in 5 maybe 10 years we will , but people will still disagree even then ! "I really don't think you need to be an economic expert to be able to predict with reasonable certainty that if you make it harder to trade with your closest, richest and biggest trading partner you're going to probably be worse off, not better off. If I'm wrong then why can't any of the many BREXITers on this site explain to me, or anyone else, how making it harder to trade with our closest, richest and biggest trading partner could even possibly make us better off. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? We answer to the European Court of justice. I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems." I'm thinking delusional,more than truthful. Trading partners,you seem to have forgotten the rest of the world,including the USA,and China. When free of the EU,our trading options will be limitless. And let's face it, when all the Sabre rattlings done, When all the threats, and counter threats,are over. The EU will be only too happy, to agree a trade deal with the UK. Even though we've pissed them off, they're hardly going to cut off their nose,to spite their face. I only hope we can fit them in. . The European Court of justice You are the only person in Europe,who does not answer to European law, well done. For everyone else, The primacy/supremacy of EU law,applies. This states that when there is conflict between EU law,and the law of member states, European law prevails. This principle was developed by the European Court of justice . the EU commission alone, Are responsible for drawing up proposals for new EU legislation. . Sets EU spending targets. . Draws up annual budgets. . Supervises how the money is spent. . Enforces EU law,together with The european court of justice (except for you) . Speaks on behalf of all countries within the European union, particularly in trade and policy. . Negotiates international agreements for the EU So not realy like the UKs civil service. In fact,all that sounds more akin to the British cabinet. With Mr Juncker in the prime minister role. perhaps that's the reason people feel,they should also be democratically elected. . So you didn't already know the correct and truthful answers. In fact,when you look at it, you didn't know any of the answers at all. . Your complete lack of honest information concerning the EU. Has me wondering, what criteria you used, when deciding to vote remain. Did you toss a coin. Or did you just ask the pantomime dame. . You keep saying,you and I, Like the EU's carrying out some kind of personal vendetta. Where as,it's much worse than that, They're messing up the whole of the UK, With the ever increasing likelyhood, It'll soon be the whole of the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? We answer to the European Court of justice. I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems. I'm thinking delusional,more than truthful. Trading partners,you seem to have forgotten the rest of the world,including the USA,and China. When free of the EU,our trading options will be limitless. And let's face it, when all the Sabre rattlings done, When all the threats, and counter threats,are over. The EU will be only too happy, to agree a trade deal with the UK. Even though we've pissed them off, they're hardly going to cut off their nose,to spite their face. I only hope we can fit them in. . The European Court of justice You are the only person in Europe,who does not answer to European law, well done. For everyone else, The primacy/supremacy of EU law,applies. This states that when there is conflict between EU law,and the law of member states, European law prevails. This principle was developed by the European Court of justice " You really should check your facts before reciting more BREXIT lies. The European Court of Justice interprets EU law to make sure it is applied in the same way in all EU countries, and settles legal disputes between NATIONAL GOVERMENTS and EU institutions. It can also, in certain circumstances, be used by individuals, companies or organisations to take action against an EU institution, if they feel it has somehow infringed their rights. There are absolutely no circumstances where the European Court of Justice can take action against any individual or hold any individual answerable for anything. The same applies to institutions and companies, except EU institutions. The European Court of Justice can only take action and hold accountable EU institutions when they act incorrectly or governments when they refuse to stick to the EU agreements that they have agreed to. (Such as when Germany and France refused to allow British Beef to be sold. The European Court Ruled that Germany and France were acting illegally. Unlike with the USA, which still illegally bans British Beef but, as there is no court to enforce the US to trade fairly in Beef there is nothing we can do about it). " . the EU commission alone, Are responsible for drawing up proposals for new EU legislation. . Sets EU spending targets. . Draws up annual budgets. . Supervises how the money is spent. . Enforces EU law,together with The european court of justice (except for you) . Speaks on behalf of all countries within the European union, particularly in trade and policy. . Negotiates international agreements for the EU So not realy like the UKs civil service. In fact,all that sounds more akin to the British cabinet. With Mr Juncker in the prime minister role. perhaps that's the reason people feel,they should also be democratically elected. . " That's simply not true either but you may have made a genuine mistake on this one because it's really a little complex. What we call 'The European Commission' is actually two bodies: One is the "Commission", which is the administrative body of about 23,000 European Civil Servants who are split into departments called directorates-general and services. This, exactly like the Civil Service in Britain or any other democracy anywhere in world, is never elected and remains politically neutral. The other is the "College of Commissioners". This Consists of one member per member state (currently 28) of which one member is elected President of the College (Commission President) by being proposed by the democratically accountable Council of Ministers and then being approved by the democratically elected European Parliament. It is the "College of Commissioners" who act in a similar role to Civil Service heads of department in the British Civil Service, and their immediate teams in their departments are called 'Cabinets'. There is one big difference however between the 'College of Commissioners' and that normally of the heads of departments in a Civil Service, you allude to it in your comment, and that is that they can initiate legislation. However they can only initiate legislation that either directly relates to implementing an already agreed treaty requirement, and only then if its not possible to construct the legislation adequately at a national level; if the democratically accountable Council of Ministers or democratically elected European Parliament instructs then to do so. " So you didn't already know the correct and truthful answers. In fact,when you look at it, you didn't know any of the answers at all. Your complete lack of honest information concerning the EU. Has me wondering, what criteria you used, when deciding to vote remain. Did you toss a coin. Or did you just ask the pantomime dame. " Shame you couldn't just make the BREXIT case without throwing in the personal attack but it's what we've come to expect fro BREXTREAMISTS these days but your actually wrong on both counts. I do know the truth and I also know quite in depth how the EU works and functions. " You keep saying,you and I, Like the EU's carrying out some kind of personal vendetta. Where as,it's much worse than that, They're messing up the whole of the UK, With the ever increasing likelyhood, It'll soon be the whole of the EU. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Trading partners,you seem to have forgotten the rest of the world,including the USA,and China. When free of the EU,our trading options will be limitless. And let's face it, when all the Sabre rattlings done, When all the threats, and counter threats,are over. The EU will be only too happy, to agree a trade deal with the UK. Even though we've pissed them off, they're hardly going to cut off their nose,to spite their face. I only hope we can fit them in. . The European Court of justice You are the only person in Europe,who does not answer to European law, well done. For everyone else, The primacy/supremacy of EU law,applies. This states that when there is conflict between EU law,and the law of member states, European law prevails. This principle was developed by the European Court of justice . the EU commission alone, Are responsible for drawing up proposals for new EU legislation. . Sets EU spending targets. . Draws up annual budgets. . Supervises how the money is spent. . Enforces EU law,together with The european court of justice (except for you) . Speaks on behalf of all countries within the European union, particularly in trade and policy. . Negotiates international agreements for the EU So not realy like the UKs civil service. In fact,all that sounds more akin to the British cabinet. With Mr Juncker in the prime minister role. perhaps that's the reason people feel,they should also be democratically elected. . So you didn't already know the correct and truthful answers. In fact,when you look at it, you didn't know any of the answers at all. . Your complete lack of honest information concerning the EU. Has me wondering, what criteria you used, when deciding to vote remain. Did you toss a coin. Or did you just ask the pantomime dame. . You keep saying,you and I, Like the EU's carrying out some kind of personal vendetta. Where as,it's much worse than that, They're messing up the whole of the UK, With the ever increasing likelyhood, It'll soon be the whole of the EU. " We already trade with the rest of the world. How come Germany does so much better than us? We have gone through the trade negotiation discussion before, but it's generally harder to negotiate a good deal with a large organisation when you are a small one unless you have something vital for them. What do we have that's vital? Also, a negotiation with the EU will be highly political as they will need to discourage any other countries from leaving. We are subject to the treaties that our government has negotiated on our behalf with any nation. The ECJ interprets treaty disputes in the open. Most trade deal arbitration is in secret. Just for fun I'll repost this from earlier in the thread. It's the EU definition from their website: "The Commission has the right of initiative to propose laws for adoption by the European Parliament and the Council of the EU (national ministers). In most cases, the Commission makes proposals to meet its obligations under the EU treaties, or because another EU institution, country or stakeholder has asked it to act. From April 2012, EU citizens may also call on the Commission to propose laws (European Citizens’ Initiative). Before making proposals, the Commission consults widely so that stakeholders' views can be taken into account. In general, an assessment of the potential economic, social and environmental impact of a given piece of legislation act is published along with the proposal itself. The principles of subsidiarity and proportionality mean that the EU may legislate only where action is more effective at EU level than at national, regional or local level, and then no more than necessary to attain the agreed objectives. Once EU legislation has been adopted, the Commission ensures that it is correctly applied by the EU member countries." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? We answer to the European Court of justice. I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems. I'm thinking delusional,more than truthful. Trading partners,you seem to have forgotten the rest of the world,including the USA,and China. " We've already covered trade agreements extensively on this and other threads the BREXTREMISTS just keep on coming back with the same old mis information and out right lies about it. I haven't forgotten about China, the USA or even India. Non of those markets are closer to us than Europe, India and China are not as rich per head as the EU and the US is not bigger than the EU. We've also pointed out that the level of trade with Germany, a country with a similar level of wealth per person, is about 4 times higher per head than the level of trade with the US. This is directly because, within the EU there are no impediments to trade and a system of fair arbitration if disputes arise. We don't have this with the US, China, India or anywhere else in the world and the trade with those other places is less as a result. If we do do a trade deal with the US and it does not have legally binding arbitration and unrestricted movement of capitol, goods, services and labour, then it's really not much different to what we have now with the US and will have little impact on our levels of trade with them. If it does have fair and binding arbitration along with free movement of capitol, goods, services and labour then how's that any different from being in the EU. How is a court of arbitration sitting thousands of miles away in New York, Waddington DC or San Francisco any better or worse than a court of arbitration sitting across the channel? So I'll ask again, how is making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and richest trading partners actually going to increase our levels of wealth and trade? " When free of the EU,our trading options will be limitless. " Our trading options are already limitless how can leaving the EU make them more limitless that the completely limitless that they already are? " And let's face it, when all the Sabre rattlings done, When all the threats, and counter threats,are over. The EU will be only too happy, to agree a trade deal with the UK. Even though we've pissed them off, they're hardly going to cut off their nose,to spite their face. " What makes you think that? After all if the BREXTREMIST are willing to cut of their noses, to spite their face, why wouldn't the Europeans? " I only hope we can fit them in. . The European Court of justice You are the only person in Europe,who does not answer to European law, well done. For everyone else, The primacy/supremacy of EU law,applies. This states that when there is conflict between EU law,and the law of member states, European law prevails. This principle was developed by the European Court of justice . the EU commission alone, Are responsible for drawing up proposals for new EU legislation. . Sets EU spending targets. . Draws up annual budgets. . Supervises how the money is spent. . Enforces EU law,together with The european court of justice (except for you) . Speaks on behalf of all countries within the European union, particularly in trade and policy. . Negotiates international agreements for the EU So not realy like the UKs civil service. In fact,all that sounds more akin to the British cabinet. With Mr Juncker in the prime minister role. perhaps that's the reason people feel,they should also be democratically elected. . So you didn't already know the correct and truthful answers. In fact,when you look at it, you didn't know any of the answers at all. . Your complete lack of honest information concerning the EU. Has me wondering, what criteria you used, when deciding to vote remain. Did you toss a coin. Or did you just ask the pantomime dame. . You keep saying,you and I, Like the EU's carrying out some kind of personal vendetta. Where as,it's much worse than that, They're messing up the whole of the UK, With the ever increasing likelihood, It'll soon be the whole of the EU. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? We answer to the European Court of justice. I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems. I'm thinking delusional,more than truthful. Trading partners,you seem to have forgotten the rest of the world,including the USA,and China. We've already covered trade agreements extensively on this and other threads the BREXTREMISTS just keep on coming back with the same old mis information and out right lies about it. I haven't forgotten about China, the USA or even India. Non of those markets are closer to us than Europe, India and China are not as rich per head as the EU and the US is not bigger than the EU. We've also pointed out that the level of trade with Germany, a country with a similar level of wealth per person, is about 4 times higher per head than the level of trade with the US. This is directly because, within the EU there are no impediments to trade and a system of fair arbitration if disputes arise. We don't have this with the US, China, India or anywhere else in the world and the trade with those other places is less as a result. If we do do a trade deal with the US and it does not have legally binding arbitration and unrestricted movement of capitol, goods, services and labour, then it's really not much different to what we have now with the US and will have little impact on our levels of trade with them. If it does have fair and binding arbitration along with free movement of capitol, goods, services and labour then how's that any different from being in the EU. How is a court of arbitration sitting thousands of miles away in New York, Waddington DC or San Francisco any better or worse than a court of arbitration sitting across the channel? So I'll ask again, how is making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and richest trading partners actually going to increase our levels of wealth and trade? When free of the EU,our trading options will be limitless. Our trading options are already limitless how can leaving the EU make them more limitless that the completely limitless that they already are? And let's face it, when all the Sabre rattlings done, When all the threats, and counter threats,are over. The EU will be only too happy, to agree a trade deal with the UK. Even though we've pissed them off, they're hardly going to cut off their nose,to spite their face. What makes you think that? After all if the BREXTREMIST are willing to cut of their noses, to spite their face, why wouldn't the Europeans? I only hope we can fit them in. . The European Court of justice You are the only person in Europe,who does not answer to European law, well done. For everyone else, The primacy/supremacy of EU law,applies. This states that when there is conflict between EU law,and the law of member states, European law prevails. This principle was developed by the European Court of justice . the EU commission alone, Are responsible for drawing up proposals for new EU legislation. . Sets EU spending targets. . Draws up annual budgets. . Supervises how the money is spent. . Enforces EU law,together with The european court of justice (except for you) . Speaks on behalf of all countries within the European union, particularly in trade and policy. . Negotiates international agreements for the EU So not realy like the UKs civil service. In fact,all that sounds more akin to the British cabinet. With Mr Juncker in the prime minister role. perhaps that's the reason people feel,they should also be democratically elected. . So you didn't already know the correct and truthful answers. In fact,when you look at it, you didn't know any of the answers at all. . Your complete lack of honest information concerning the EU. Has me wondering, what criteria you used, when deciding to vote remain. Did you toss a coin. Or did you just ask the pantomime dame. . You keep saying,you and I, Like the EU's carrying out some kind of personal vendetta. Where as,it's much worse than that, They're messing up the whole of the UK, With the ever increasing likelihood, It'll soon be the whole of the EU. " I said "our closest trading partners,are not even close to being the biggest and wealthiest" I'm only going by what the world Bank,and the IMF say. Maybe you know better. . Listen!do you hear that, THAT IS,the biggest,and wealthiest country, Knocking on our door, Free trade deal in hand. This would not have been possible. Had the UK remained in the EU. That makes a bit of a mockery of your claim, Of just how limitless our trading options already were. It Also answers your question, Of how we could increase our levels of wealth and trade, by making harder to trade with our closest trading partners. . I'm beginning to think, had you made any real effort, to find any genuine facts, before the referendum, You could have been a Brextremist yourself. . Being a Remainer, must be so hard Living under that cloud Watching the sun Constantly shine On brexitland. . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? We answer to the European Court of justice. I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems. I'm thinking delusional,more than truthful. Trading partners,you seem to have forgotten the rest of the world,including the USA,and China. We've already covered trade agreements extensively on this and other threads the BREXTREMISTS just keep on coming back with the same old mis information and out right lies about it. I haven't forgotten about China, the USA or even India. Non of those markets are closer to us than Europe, India and China are not as rich per head as the EU and the US is not bigger than the EU. We've also pointed out that the level of trade with Germany, a country with a similar level of wealth per person, is about 4 times higher per head than the level of trade with the US. This is directly because, within the EU there are no impediments to trade and a system of fair arbitration if disputes arise. We don't have this with the US, China, India or anywhere else in the world and the trade with those other places is less as a result. If we do do a trade deal with the US and it does not have legally binding arbitration and unrestricted movement of capitol, goods, services and labour, then it's really not much different to what we have now with the US and will have little impact on our levels of trade with them. If it does have fair and binding arbitration along with free movement of capitol, goods, services and labour then how's that any different from being in the EU. How is a court of arbitration sitting thousands of miles away in New York, Waddington DC or San Francisco any better or worse than a court of arbitration sitting across the channel? So I'll ask again, how is making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and richest trading partners actually going to increase our levels of wealth and trade? When free of the EU,our trading options will be limitless. Our trading options are already limitless how can leaving the EU make them more limitless that the completely limitless that they already are? And let's face it, when all the Sabre rattlings done, When all the threats, and counter threats,are over. The EU will be only too happy, to agree a trade deal with the UK. Even though we've pissed them off, they're hardly going to cut off their nose,to spite their face. What makes you think that? After all if the BREXTREMIST are willing to cut of their noses, to spite their face, why wouldn't the Europeans? I only hope we can fit them in. . The European Court of justice You are the only person in Europe,who does not answer to European law, well done. For everyone else, The primacy/supremacy of EU law,applies. This states that when there is conflict between EU law,and the law of member states, European law prevails. This principle was developed by the European Court of justice . the EU commission alone, Are responsible for drawing up proposals for new EU legislation. . Sets EU spending targets. . Draws up annual budgets. . Supervises how the money is spent. . Enforces EU law,together with The european court of justice (except for you) . Speaks on behalf of all countries within the European union, particularly in trade and policy. . Negotiates international agreements for the EU So not realy like the UKs civil service. In fact,all that sounds more akin to the British cabinet. With Mr Juncker in the prime minister role. perhaps that's the reason people feel,they should also be democratically elected. . So you didn't already know the correct and truthful answers. In fact,when you look at it, you didn't know any of the answers at all. . Your complete lack of honest information concerning the EU. Has me wondering, what criteria you used, when deciding to vote remain. Did you toss a coin. Or did you just ask the pantomime dame. . You keep saying,you and I, Like the EU's carrying out some kind of personal vendetta. Where as,it's much worse than that, They're messing up the whole of the UK, With the ever increasing likelihood, It'll soon be the whole of the EU. I said "our closest trading partners,are not even close to being the biggest and wealthiest" I'm only going by what the world Bank,and the IMF say. Maybe you know better. . Listen!do you hear that, THAT IS,the biggest,and wealthiest country, Knocking on our door, Free trade deal in hand. This would not have been possible. Had the UK remained in the EU. That makes a bit of a mockery of your claim, Of just how limitless our trading options already were. It Also answers your question, Of how we could increase our levels of wealth and trade, by making harder to trade with our closest trading partners. . I'm beginning to think, had you made any real effort, to find any genuine facts, before the referendum, You could have been a Brextremist yourself. . Being a Remainer, must be so hard Living under that cloud Watching the sun Constantly shine On brexitland. . "anyone actually read this shit? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The thing I notice most about these threads is that the BREXITers never actually really defend BREXIT. They just attack anyone who won't go along with their muddled plans almost as if democracy stopped on the 23 June. I'm still waiting for any BRRXITer to tell us how making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partners is actually going to increase our overall levels of trade and wealth. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me what EU court they think they are answerable to as I know not one that I am answerable to. I'm also still waiting for any BREXITer to tell me why it's undemocratic for heads of the EU's Civil Service (the Commission) to be unelected but perfectly democratic, in fact some would day essential for the functioning of democracy, for the heads of the British Civil Service to be politically neutral and unelected. These are just three simple question, among many more that have been asked, that BREXITers simply will not answer. I wonder why? Our Closest trading partners, are not even close to being our biggest,and wealthiest Trading partners. The EU is our closest, biggest and wealthiest trading partner but, rather than just saying "O know it isn't" like some pantomime dame, maybe you could tell us, if not the EU, then who is? We answer to the European Court of justice. I don't answer to the European Court of Justice or any other EU court. If you feel you do maybe you should tell us in what way you have been held answerable to the European Court of Justice? The British Civil Service, comply with the British governments wishes. The EU's Civil Service,dictate the EU's wishes. Simply untrue. The EU's Civil Service (the Commission) does not dictate the EU's wishes. The Commission acts at the request, and is accountable to, the democratically elected European Parliament and the democratically accountable Council of Ministers. Maybe, rather than just saying the EU commission dictates the wishes of the EU you could give some examples of where the EU commission has dictated anything to you. I'm a brexiter,answering all three questions. I'm quite surprised you even had to ask a brexiter,don't they have Google where you live. Any other questions,you only have to ask. If your not bright enough yourself, I'll Google it for you. I'm not really overly interested in your thoughts on how bright or otherwise you think I might be but thanks for the offer to google for me. However I already know the truthful answers to the questions I ask and, like any good advocate, seldom ask a question that I don't already know the correct and truthful answer to. The question is for you to try and answer truthfully, something BREXITers seem to struggle with it seems. I'm thinking delusional,more than truthful. Trading partners,you seem to have forgotten the rest of the world,including the USA,and China. We've already covered trade agreements extensively on this and other threads the BREXTREMISTS just keep on coming back with the same old mis information and out right lies about it. I haven't forgotten about China, the USA or even India. Non of those markets are closer to us than Europe, India and China are not as rich per head as the EU and the US is not bigger than the EU. We've also pointed out that the level of trade with Germany, a country with a similar level of wealth per person, is about 4 times higher per head than the level of trade with the US. This is directly because, within the EU there are no impediments to trade and a system of fair arbitration if disputes arise. We don't have this with the US, China, India or anywhere else in the world and the trade with those other places is less as a result. If we do do a trade deal with the US and it does not have legally binding arbitration and unrestricted movement of capitol, goods, services and labour, then it's really not much different to what we have now with the US and will have little impact on our levels of trade with them. If it does have fair and binding arbitration along with free movement of capitol, goods, services and labour then how's that any different from being in the EU. How is a court of arbitration sitting thousands of miles away in New York, Waddington DC or San Francisco any better or worse than a court of arbitration sitting across the channel? So I'll ask again, how is making it harder to trade with our closest, biggest and richest trading partners actually going to increase our levels of wealth and trade? When free of the EU,our trading options will be limitless. Our trading options are already limitless how can leaving the EU make them more limitless that the completely limitless that they already are? And let's face it, when all the Sabre rattlings done, When all the threats, and counter threats,are over. The EU will be only too happy, to agree a trade deal with the UK. Even though we've pissed them off, they're hardly going to cut off their nose,to spite their face. What makes you think that? After all if the BREXTREMIST are willing to cut of their noses, to spite their face, why wouldn't the Europeans? I only hope we can fit them in. . The European Court of justice You are the only person in Europe,who does not answer to European law, well done. For everyone else, The primacy/supremacy of EU law,applies. This states that when there is conflict between EU law,and the law of member states, European law prevails. This principle was developed by the European Court of justice . the EU commission alone, Are responsible for drawing up proposals for new EU legislation. . Sets EU spending targets. . Draws up annual budgets. . Supervises how the money is spent. . Enforces EU law,together with The european court of justice (except for you) . Speaks on behalf of all countries within the European union, particularly in trade and policy. . Negotiates international agreements for the EU So not realy like the UKs civil service. In fact,all that sounds more akin to the British cabinet. With Mr Juncker in the prime minister role. perhaps that's the reason people feel,they should also be democratically elected. . So you didn't already know the correct and truthful answers. In fact,when you look at it, you didn't know any of the answers at all. . Your complete lack of honest information concerning the EU. Has me wondering, what criteria you used, when deciding to vote remain. Did you toss a coin. Or did you just ask the pantomime dame. . You keep saying,you and I, Like the EU's carrying out some kind of personal vendetta. Where as,it's much worse than that, They're messing up the whole of the UK, With the ever increasing likelihood, It'll soon be the whole of the EU. I said "our closest trading partners,are not even close to being the biggest and wealthiest" I'm only going by what the world Bank,and the IMF say. Maybe you know better. . Listen!do you hear that, THAT IS,the biggest,and wealthiest country, Knocking on our door, Free trade deal in hand. This would not have been possible. Had the UK remained in the EU. That makes a bit of a mockery of your claim, Of just how limitless our trading options already were. It Also answers your question, Of how we could increase our levels of wealth and trade, by making harder to trade with our closest trading partners. . I'm beginning to think, had you made any real effort, to find any genuine facts, before the referendum, You could have been a Brextremist yourself. . Being a Remainer, must be so hard Living under that cloud Watching the sun Constantly shine On brexitland. .
anyone actually read this shit?"Only you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I said "our closest trading partners,are not even close to being the biggest and wealthiest" I'm only going by what the world Bank,and the IMF say. Maybe you know better. . Listen!do you hear that, THAT IS,the biggest,and wealthiest country, Knocking on our door, Free trade deal in hand. This would not have been possible. Had the UK remained in the EU. That makes a bit of a mockery of your claim, Of just how limitless our trading options already were. It Also answers your question, Of how we could increase our levels of wealth and trade, by making harder to trade with our closest trading partners. . I'm beginning to think, had you made any real effort, to find any genuine facts, before the referendum, You could have been a Brextremist yourself. . Being a Remainer, must be so hard Living under that cloud Watching the sun Constantly shine On brexitland. . "Well, actually, they are close. Much closer as a block than we are alone, so much better able to trade on equal terms, which us what we do. As a block. So the Donald, who has said very clearly that he will make America great again will do a deal with a significantly smaller nation on equal terms due to his largesse? He won't screw us into the ground? Why shouldn't he if we will benefit from access to a far larger market than the US will? You don't feel that we are going to be trailing around after them from here on? Trump has alienated China so do you think they'll be opening their doors to us? In fact the whole of south east Asia and Europe aren't going to be politically well disposed towards us, unless you think otherwise? Europe is currently our HOME market. When the economic cycle takes us into recession again we will not have so any people to sell to without barriers. It will be rougher. Thinking geopolitical, Trump thinks that Russia is not a threat so who need a an economically and politically strong Europe? Better for the US, better for Russia, China, India and ISIS if Europe is divided and unable to work together coherently at all. I still only see belief. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
