FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Tuesday is Brexit day.....
Tuesday is Brexit day.....
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
In business there is the saying about 'fail fast'. Ie work out as quick as possible if you are making a mistake. It doesn't quite fit here, but seeing as we are set on this fuckup then I'm glad for us to at least get it started as soon as possible.
Davis had just urged MPs to not amend the bill as it would screw with their timetable. So clearly he values haste over anything else.
So are the leavers planning street parties for the day? Or they saving them until we actually leave? Speaking of which how do we formally conclude negotiations? Seeing as leavers think this is all going to be done and dusted within the two year deadline, how do we actually conclude when we are 'done'?
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
Just wondering what the remainers excuse will be if Article 50 is called on Tuesday and we don't go into immediate recession on Wednesday.
Just in case, I'm having my house valued tomorrow, and again the following week to see if the price has gone down by 20%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Just wondering what the remainers excuse will be if Article 50 is called on Tuesday and we don't go into immediate recession on Wednesday.
Just in case, I'm having my house valued tomorrow, and again the following week to see if the price has gone down by 20%."
Yawn. Why troll on your own thread?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Just wondering what the remainers excuse will be if Article 50 is called on Tuesday and we don't go into immediate recession on Wednesday.
Just in case, I'm having my house valued tomorrow, and again the following week to see if the price has gone down by 20%.
Yawn. Why troll on your own thread? "
How is this my thread? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"It means we maybe out in five years lol,the two year thing is impossible whatever is written down or promised"
Actually I think that the scene is very much being set for a crashing out of the EU in the shortest possible time.
The Press are already stepping up the demonisation of "the enemy" and all blame for any kind of EU challenge to the UK position will be met with fury and anger. The gullible who were led by the hand to vote for Brexit will become even more inflamed at the outrage of the "unelected and undemocratic EU" daring to challenge the will of the British people.
In short, PM May will use the fury generated by the Press as an excuse to just walk away on the basis that a sudden shock is better than a prolonged period of uncertainty.
And that will be that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In business there is the saying about 'fail fast'. Ie work out as quick as possible if you are making a mistake. It doesn't quite fit here, but seeing as we are set on this fuckup then I'm glad for us to at least get it started as soon as possible.
Davis had just urged MPs to not amend the bill as it would screw with their timetable. So clearly he values haste over anything else.
So are the leavers planning street parties for the day? Or they saving them until we actually leave? Speaking of which how do we formally conclude negotiations? Seeing as leavers think this is all going to be done and dusted within the two year deadline, how do we actually conclude when we are 'done'?
-Matt"
I'd love to attend a street party to celebrate, but I bet the loony left remoaners go on a spree of destruction as all good well meaning lefties would do, after all it's right leaning Brexit camp who are the bad peeps in all of this |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It means we maybe out in five years lol,the two year thing is impossible whatever is written down or promised
Actually I think that the scene is very much being set for a crashing out of the EU in the shortest possible time.
The Press are already stepping up the demonisation of "the enemy" and all blame for any kind of EU challenge to the UK position will be met with fury and anger. The gullible who were led by the hand to vote for Brexit will become even more inflamed at the outrage of the "unelected and undemocratic EU" daring to challenge the will of the British people.
In short, PM May will use the fury generated by the Press as an excuse to just walk away on the basis that a sudden shock is better than a prolonged period of uncertainty.
And that will be that."
Nobody led me by the hand, I had made my mind up 20 years ago, and I'm certainly not gullible. But I am willing to stand up be counted and work hard so it's a successs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It means we maybe out in five years lol,the two year thing is impossible whatever is written down or promised
Actually I think that the scene is very much being set for a crashing out of the EU in the shortest possible time.
The Press are already stepping up the demonisation of "the enemy" and all blame for any kind of EU challenge to the UK position will be met with fury and anger. The gullible who were led by the hand to vote for Brexit will become even more inflamed at the outrage of the "unelected and undemocratic EU" daring to challenge the will of the British people.
In short, PM May will use the fury generated by the Press as an excuse to just walk away on the basis that a sudden shock is better than a prolonged period of uncertainty.
And that will be that."
Fast is so much better than a long drawn out what if, but if only slowly slowly process. Times money better to crack on move on and push hard |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ost SockMan
over a year ago
West Wales and Cardiff |
I accept the British people voted as they did. We have to get on with it.
I won't stop saying that I think it's been a horrendously flawed exercise and decision though.
In twenty years time I'll be happy to be proved wrong. I hope those Leave voters I know well will do the same.
It's OMG no for me. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I accept the British people voted as they did. We have to get on with it.
I won't stop saying that I think it's been a horrendously flawed exercise and decision though.
In twenty years time I'll be happy to be proved wrong. I hope those Leave voters I know well will do the same.
It's OMG no for me."
Must say as a leave voter I respect your views, which are well put, but as for a flawed process, it was a very simple option even for those who unlike you are definitely challanged in the brain cell department.
In or out can't get any simpler, as for those who seem able to predict the future and what it will be, they have been wrong more than they have been right
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
"Just wondering what the remainers excuse will be if Article 50 is called on Tuesday and we don't go into immediate recession on Wednesday.
Just in case, I'm having my house valued tomorrow, and again the following week to see if the price has gone down by 20%.
Yawn. Why troll on your own thread?
How is this my thread?"
Ha! My mistake. Troll away.
It's adds so much  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
You can garantee the markets will have a major wobble when article 50 is triggered just the same as when the uk voted to leave.
You can also garantee that all of the pundits will be saying we told you this would happen 
This is not rocket science as there will be shed loads of money made by some of the super rich on the buying and selling of shares.
And then things will settle down again while the government work out just what rules will work for both sides to get on with business because the EU needs to trade just the same as the UK does.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asyukMan
over a year ago
West London |
It's a shame that we have chosen to leave without any idea of what the future relationship with the EU will be.
It will also be disappointing that having chosen to do so, the government has chosen to prioritise immigration control which will leave to the loss of the opportunity to maintain a comprehensive, tariff free trade relationship with the EU.
It is also sad that we are making negotiations over remaining aspects of the relationship with the EU harder by not taking a lead on EU, and therefore UK, citizens' rights with the amendment tabled. The government has decided to try to look "tough".
Finally it is ironic and rather sad that the other amendment to guarantee the supremacy of the UK Parliament will not be carried but private, verbal assurances will be given to Tory MPs to which the government cannot be held.
We'll see how it goes. Nobody has explained the benefits yet although Boris says no deal.with the EU will be fine but Fox says that it won't.
Yay us. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"In business there is the saying about 'fail fast'. Ie work out as quick as possible if you are making a mistake. It doesn't quite fit here, but seeing as we are set on this fuckup then I'm glad for us to at least get it started as soon as possible.
Davis had just urged MPs to not amend the bill as it would screw with their timetable. So clearly he values haste over anything else.
So are the leavers planning street parties for the day? Or they saving them until we actually leave? Speaking of which how do we formally conclude negotiations? Seeing as leavers think this is all going to be done and dusted within the two year deadline, how do we actually conclude when we are 'done'?
-Matt
I'd love to attend a street party to celebrate, but I bet the loony left remoaners go on a spree of destruction as all good well meaning lefties would do, after all it's right leaning Brexit camp who are the bad peeps in all of this"
Why would we go on a spree of destruction? Aren't we meant to be too busy moaning and crying liberal snowflake tears into our tea or something?
Go ahead, hold your street party! You should be proud that you have achieved what you wanted.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ost SockMan
over a year ago
West Wales and Cardiff |
"I accept the British people voted as they did. We have to get on with it.
I won't stop saying that I think it's been a horrendously flawed exercise and decision though.
In twenty years time I'll be happy to be proved wrong. I hope those Leave voters I know well will do the same.
It's OMG no for me.
Must say as a leave voter I respect your views, which are well put, but as for a flawed process, it was a very simple option even for those who unlike you are definitely challanged in the brain cell department.
In or out can't get any simpler, as for those who seem able to predict the future and what it will be, they have been wrong more than they have been right
"
Thanks, I happily respect you too, even though I disagree with your views on this  .
The whole reason I think it was flawed is that it was so simple. I'm 100% with Ken Clarke in that you can't answer such a complex question with a simple yes/no (though I don't think his speech was as good as was made out). I think the subsequent tortuous wranglings over hard versus soft Brexit back that assertion up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In business there is the saying about 'fail fast'. Ie work out as quick as possible if you are making a mistake. It doesn't quite fit here, but seeing as we are set on this fuckup then I'm glad for us to at least get it started as soon as possible.
Davis had just urged MPs to not amend the bill as it would screw with their timetable. So clearly he values haste over anything else.
So are the leavers planning street parties for the day? Or they saving them until we actually leave? Speaking of which how do we formally conclude negotiations? Seeing as leavers think this is all going to be done and dusted within the two year deadline, how do we actually conclude when we are 'done'?
-Matt
I'd love to attend a street party to celebrate, but I bet the loony left remoaners go on a spree of destruction as all good well meaning lefties would do, after all it's right leaning Brexit camp who are the bad peeps in all of this"
Would love to come to your Brexit street party. 
Feel like a party is due tonight, the house of commons just voted in the last hour to reject the 2 Lords ammendments on the Brexit bill.
Saying on the news now it will go back to the Lords again but only the Lib dem Lords will try to throw it back to the Commons for a 2nd time, the Labour Lords are going to throw the towel in and give up. So the Brexit bill could be passed tonight by the Lords and the commons and Teresa May will have the authority to trigger article 50 when ever she likes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out? "
Neither, its been factored in |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I agree with a caller on lbc that the torrys are all talk, the scots are holding the upper hand 
The upper hand in what?  "
To delay the article 50 and for independence. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out? "
I think Teresa May will give a couple of weeks notice of the date for article 50. It won't be tomorrow, they are saying on the news looks like March 27th. Business and the markets will know what's coming and they have already been planning for it to happen to some extent since the result in June last year anyway. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in"
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I agree with a caller on lbc that the torrys are all talk, the scots are holding the upper hand
The upper hand in what? To delay the article 50 and for independence. "
I think you are clutching at straws there. If Scotland have an indy ref 2 it won't be allowed until the Brexit process is complete and we are out of the EU. So you are looking at 2019 or 2020 at the earliest for any possible Indy ref 2 referendum in Scotland (if it happens at all?). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely "
not alot would happen if think alot of people already know what's gona happen ...a couple of days after when the eu makes their first statement..then things might start happening |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely "
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"All my British shares are doing shit at moment and I'm keen to unload them before the shit really hits the fan"
You've got the wrong shares then. My companies shares are flying  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"All my British shares are doing shit at moment and I'm keen to unload them before the shit really hits the fan
You've got the wrong shares then. My companies shares are flying "
Did you buy yours during the recession? But are shares an indicator of the economy or the company? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"All my British shares are doing shit at moment and I'm keen to unload them before the shit really hits the fan
You've got the wrong shares then. My companies shares are flying
Did you buy yours during the recession? But are shares an indicator of the economy or the company?"
Incorrect use of grammer by me, apologies. My company's shares are flying, meaning the company I work for and it is an indication of how well the economy is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"All my British shares are doing shit at moment and I'm keen to unload them before the shit really hits the fan
You've got the wrong shares then. My companies shares are flying "
Can I buy some?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In business there is the saying about 'fail fast'. Ie work out as quick as possible if you are making a mistake. It doesn't quite fit here, but seeing as we are set on this fuckup then I'm glad for us to at least get it started as soon as possible.
Davis had just urged MPs to not amend the bill as it would screw with their timetable. So clearly he values haste over anything else.
So are the leavers planning street parties for the day? Or they saving them until we actually leave? Speaking of which how do we formally conclude negotiations? Seeing as leavers think this is all going to be done and dusted within the two year deadline, how do we actually conclude when we are 'done'?
-Matt
I'd love to attend a street party to celebrate, but I bet the loony left remoaners go on a spree of destruction as all good well meaning lefties would do, after all it's right leaning Brexit camp who are the bad peeps in all of this
Would love to come to your Brexit street party.
Feel like a party is due tonight, the house of commons just voted in the last hour to reject the 2 Lords ammendments on the Brexit bill.
Saying on the news now it will go back to the Lords again but only the Lib dem Lords will try to throw it back to the Commons for a 2nd time, the Labour Lords are going to throw the towel in and give up. So the Brexit bill could be passed tonight by the Lords and the commons and Teresa May will have the authority to trigger article 50 when ever she likes. "
Ammendments also rejected by the Lords now after it was sent back by the Commons. Peter Mandelson was on BBC Newsnight tonight with a face like a smacked arse.
So the Brexit bill is passed by the Commons and the Lords unamended now, only requires Royal ascent by the Queen and that is expected to happen tomorrow. Happy days |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"The UK should now hit the pedal to the floor and hit that Brexit wall head on full speed with no seatbelts and have the hardest of hard brexits "
Like, why even bother to leave the EU, when we could just nuke the other 27 members? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO "
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The UK should now hit the pedal to the floor and hit that Brexit wall head on full speed with no seatbelts and have the hardest of hard brexits
Like, why even bother to leave the EU, when we could just nuke the other 27 members? "
Aye, we don't need'em anyway, we can sell all our shit to Mozambique instead |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"The UK should now hit the pedal to the floor and hit that Brexit wall head on full speed with no seatbelts and have the hardest of hard brexits
Like, why even bother to leave the EU, when we could just nuke the other 27 members?
Aye, we don't need'em anyway, we can sell all our shit to Mozambique instead "
Look at the growth potential of our exports to the Democratic Republic of Congo! Think they need some satellite comments and financial services? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that? "
It's about striking the right balance. The pound was over valued before the EU referendum that's why The bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound over the last 3 years (as revealed by former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King). It dropped in value after the leave vote but if it rises slightly on current levels that would be ok. I don't think UK exporters, the UK tourism industry or the bank of England want it to rise to pre referendum levels though but somewhere in between would be ok. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that?
It's about striking the right balance. The pound was over valued before the EU referendum that's why The bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound over the last 3 years (as revealed by former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King). It dropped in value after the leave vote but if it rises slightly on current levels that would be ok. I don't think UK exporters, the UK tourism industry or the bank of England want it to rise to pre referendum levels though but somewhere in between would be ok. "
Ok, well you said that you campaigned for Leave, please can you point to some official literature that said that the £ was overvalued and that a Leave vote would cause it to devalue by 20%? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that?
It's about striking the right balance. The pound was over valued before the EU referendum that's why The bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound over the last 3 years (as revealed by former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King). It dropped in value after the leave vote but if it rises slightly on current levels that would be ok. I don't think UK exporters, the UK tourism industry or the bank of England want it to rise to pre referendum levels though but somewhere in between would be ok.
Ok, well you said that you campaigned for Leave, please can you point to some official literature that said that the £ was overvalued and that a Leave vote would cause it to devalue by 20%? "
It was the former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King who said the pound was over valued and that the bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound for the last 3 years. Do keep up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that? "
No I didn't, I said we want a competetive pound and all I am saying here is what I think will happen this year, not what is good or bad . And I think you over estimate me if you think I can influence the value of the pound |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Just wondering what the remainers excuse will be if Article 50 is called on Tuesday and we don't go into immediate recession on Wednesday.
Just in case, I'm having my house valued tomorrow, and again the following week to see if the price has gone down by 20%."
An amusing post . I nearly spilt my tea laughing when I read it. At least on this occasion they cannot attempt to claim that is due to foreign currency movement .
Anyone selling their investments last June based on the predictioms of Project Gloom would have lost 25 % of the value of their investments. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that?
It's about striking the right balance. The pound was over valued before the EU referendum that's why The bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound over the last 3 years (as revealed by former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King). It dropped in value after the leave vote but if it rises slightly on current levels that would be ok. I don't think UK exporters, the UK tourism industry or the bank of England want it to rise to pre referendum levels though but somewhere in between would be ok.
Ok, well you said that you campaigned for Leave, please can you point to some official literature that said that the £ was overvalued and that a Leave vote would cause it to devalue by 20%?
It was the former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King who said the pound was over valued and that the bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound for the last 3 years. Do keep up. "
But if devaluing the £ is such a good thing, and everyone knew it would happen as a result of Brexit, why wasn't it written in the literature? You make it sound like a negative unintended consequence of the vote that you are now trying to spin as a positive. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that?
It's about striking the right balance. The pound was over valued before the EU referendum that's why The bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound over the last 3 years (as revealed by former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King). It dropped in value after the leave vote but if it rises slightly on current levels that would be ok. I don't think UK exporters, the UK tourism industry or the bank of England want it to rise to pre referendum levels though but somewhere in between would be ok.
Ok, well you said that you campaigned for Leave, please can you point to some official literature that said that the £ was overvalued and that a Leave vote would cause it to devalue by 20%? "
Why don't you do what you are always advising people to do and use google?
The IMF, the ICED, the BoE, the treasury all said this before the referendum.
The treasury and George Osborne even said in an official treasury release that the pound would fall by 20% "immediately following a vote to leave".
Funnily enough though, Deutsche Bank and others are now saying that the pound is one of the most undervalued currencies in the world.
Again, try practicing what you preach and use google. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out?
Neither, its been factored in
I doubt it... There will be a bit of noise surely
Maybe with a few out to make a quick buck but generally the pound will rise slowly throughout the year with European elections and Brexit fatigue. Now is a good time to buy the pound if you can hang on to it for a while. IMO
But on the forum yesterday you said that we need a low value £ for trade, so if the £ goes up, trade will go down, right? Why would you want that?
It's about striking the right balance. The pound was over valued before the EU referendum that's why The bank of England had been trying to devalue the pound over the last 3 years (as revealed by former governor of the bank of England Mervyn King). It dropped in value after the leave vote but if it rises slightly on current levels that would be ok. I don't think UK exporters, the UK tourism industry or the bank of England want it to rise to pre referendum levels though but somewhere in between would be ok.
Ok, well you said that you campaigned for Leave, please can you point to some official literature that said that the £ was overvalued and that a Leave vote would cause it to devalue by 20%?
Why don't you do what you are always advising people to do and use google?
The IMF, the ICED, the BoE, the treasury all said this before the referendum.
The treasury and George Osborne even said in an official treasury release that the pound would fall by 20% "immediately following a vote to leave".
Funnily enough though, Deutsche Bank and others are now saying that the pound is one of the most undervalued currencies in the world.
Again, try practicing what you preach and use google."
OECD, not ICED. ...damn predictive spelling! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Any predictions to make a quick buck on the markets? Will sterling drop temporarily once its triggered? Will capital rush in or rush out? "
There is no easy way to make a quick buck.
It may sound boring but those who attenpt to time markets find that their investment performance is worse that those who stay in for the long term.
By all means attempt to time the markets but that is more of a ganble than investing .
It is probably necessary to take a ten to twenty year view on most investments.
The issues to which you refer are already factored in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would "
They lost the court cases! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases! "
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped "
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it! "
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases"
Hahahahahahahahahahahah!
Oh that is so funny.
Do you work in PR or some such? Because, that is some pretty amazing spin. "Played a blinder to get past the court cases". Not only did they lose the court cases... but they were the ones that decided to appeal the initial decision against the advice of their own legal team!
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases
Hahahahahahahahahahahah!
Oh that is so funny.
Do you work in PR or some such? Because, that is some pretty amazing spin. "Played a blinder to get past the court cases". Not only did they lose the court cases... but they were the ones that decided to appeal the initial decision against the advice of their own legal team!
-Matt"
See above |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed "
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50? "
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that? "
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power. "
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?"
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?"
It was never about avoiding hindrance from scotish Welsh or Irish parliaments, it was May trying to decide she alone held power to do what the fuck she wanted and to cut out the UK parliament out of the process, which that gina miller and the other guy who backed leave took the government to court over and won making May give our parliament the vote
Try and stay on track |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional? "
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand "
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do "
If anyone played a blinder it was the Supreme court in forcing the Government to act according to the Law. It was some N.I lawyer's that pipped up saying NI should have a say and the Supreme court denined them that right accordingly with the Law, the government was simply along for the ride. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do "
Why are you ignoring the reason they took it to appeal and the other case they fought there? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I just wish A50 would be triggered today, May goes and either gets a deal or no deal tomorrow or Thursday then we can get our car crash out of the EU over and done with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do
If anyone played a blinder it was the Supreme court in forcing the Government to act according to the Law. It was some N.I lawyer's that pipped up saying NI should have a say and the Supreme court denined them that right accordingly with the Law, the government was simply along for the ride."
Keep up. So I take it A50 won't be triggered this month then, which is what the government wanted and said all along? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do
Why are you ignoring the reason they took it to appeal and the other case they fought there?"
There was only one reason for the appeal and that was May wanting to act like some dictatorship and not allowing the UK parliament a vote which she lost. The Northern Ireland case wasn't on appeal because it never went to the high court to start with, it was decided to be dealt with at the same time through the Supreme court and that decision not to give NI parliament a vote covered the Welsh and Scottish too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do
If anyone played a blinder it was the Supreme court in forcing the Government to act according to the Law. It was some N.I lawyer's that pipped up saying NI should have a say and the Supreme court denined them that right accordingly with the Law, the government was simply along for the ride.
Keep up. So I take it A50 won't be triggered this month then, which is what the government wanted and said all along?"
That isn't part of what we are taking about. The court case wasn't about stopping or delaying A50 it was about the government acting lawfully which you are totally and absolutely failing to grasp.... as normal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do
Why are you ignoring the reason they took it to appeal and the other case they fought there?
There was only one reason for the appeal and that was May wanting to act like some dictatorship and not allowing the UK parliament a vote which she lost. The Northern Ireland case wasn't on appeal because it never went to the high court to start with, it was decided to be dealt with at the same time through the Supreme court and that decision not to give NI parliament a vote covered the Welsh and Scottish too."
Funny, you never mentioned that in your earlier post. And by dealing with it at the same time the government avoided any future cases and delays. Blinder |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do
Why are you ignoring the reason they took it to appeal and the other case they fought there?
There was only one reason for the appeal and that was May wanting to act like some dictatorship and not allowing the UK parliament a vote which she lost. The Northern Ireland case wasn't on appeal because it never went to the high court to start with, it was decided to be dealt with at the same time through the Supreme court and that decision not to give NI parliament a vote covered the Welsh and Scottish too.
Funny, you never mentioned that in your earlier post. And by dealing with it at the same time the government avoided any future cases and delays. Blinder "
Win or lose the rulings the Supreme court gave on devolved parliaments not having a say, and that Westminster and Westminster alone would decide EU matters did work in the government's favour. Gina Miller won her case and now Parliament has had the vote that she wanted, the Brexit bill has passed free of ammendments and Teresa May has the power to trigger article 50 when ever she likes (which will be before the end of March as the government originally intended anyway, lol). Happy days. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
They lost the court cases!
So? How did that derail things? In fact it helped
It wasn't about derailing anything, it was about constitutional powers. Why didn't the government just introduce legislation in the first place? Seeing as you didn't even know there was a court case, I'm not surprised you are struggling to understand it!
What do you mean I didn't know there was a court case? You can pretend it was about constitutional powers but that is beside the point anyway. The government said before the cases that A50 would be triggered by the end of March and that is now what is happening. The government appealed and went to the Supreme Court and actually got the main thing that they wanted, which was that Parliament alone at Westminster had the right to trigger A50. If they hadn't won that, it would have been delayed
You denied that there was a case, and now you show your ignorance of the basics of the case. You believe that the government took the case to court to ensure that parliament had the right to trigger article 50?
How the f.ck could I deny there was a case? I know exactly the basics of the case and win or lose those basics it wouldn't have made any difference, which it hasn't. The appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to trigger A50 without interference from the devolved parliaments which would have delayed things! Do you not understand that?
You did deny there was a case on this very forum, now you are denying your denial!
The government argued that the power to trigger article 50 was a prerogative power. They lost that arguement. It is a parliamentary power, not a prerogative power.
For goodness sake, yes we know . The point is the appeal case gave Westminster alone the power to implement A50 without any hindrance from the Scottish, Welsh and N.I parliaments which could have caused delays! Is that beyond your comprehension or are you just trolling?
So you do know that the government lost then? And what they had wanted to do was unconstitutional?
Ffs. They lost that which they knew they probably would! But while there they won the other case against the devolved parliaments which has avoided any delays and allowed them to trigger A50 when they wanted to and said they would! So yes they played a blinder. But that is probably a bit too subtle/complicated for you to understand
Ok, yes, by losing their case they somehow played a blinder by being forced to do the opposite of what they wanted to do, that was somehow exactly what they wanted to do
Why are you ignoring the reason they took it to appeal and the other case they fought there?
There was only one reason for the appeal and that was May wanting to act like some dictatorship and not allowing the UK parliament a vote which she lost. The Northern Ireland case wasn't on appeal because it never went to the high court to start with, it was decided to be dealt with at the same time through the Supreme court and that decision not to give NI parliament a vote covered the Welsh and Scottish too.
Funny, you never mentioned that in your earlier post. And by dealing with it at the same time the government avoided any future cases and delays. Blinder
Win or lose the rulings the Supreme court gave on devolved parliaments not having a say, and that Westminster and Westminster alone would decide EU matters did work in the government's favour. Gina Miller won her case and now Parliament has had the vote that she wanted, the Brexit bill has passed free of ammendments and Teresa May has the power to trigger article 50 when ever she likes (which will be before the end of March as the government originally intended anyway, lol). Happy days. "
Yes that is totally correct but a certain person likes to take a basic fact, twist it into something else that it isn't and tries telling everyone on this thread their right
The court case only half went the government's way it was defeated on not wanting to give our MP's a say but the NI challenge went in the government's favour and rightly so.
Nothing on the face of it directly suggests that gina miller took the government to court in an attempt at delaying or derailing like candM4U is trying to make out, i cant see how the government played any form of "blinder" they got ruled against by the Supreme court and made to give our MP's the vote and at the same time the challenge from Northern Ireland lawyers was dealt with which went in the government's favour which covered Scotland and Wales too.
Now im not saying Gina miller then wasn't hoping our MP' would vote against Brexit, that's a big possibility obviously but people could do to stick to the facts to avoid making themselves look delusional |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Andy, I am delusional? Can you explain then how, when 7 or 8 months ago when the government told us they would trigger Article 50 before the end of March, they have managed to time it perfectly? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Andy, I am delusional? Can you explain then how, when 7 or 8 months ago when the government told us they would trigger Article 50 before the end of March, they have managed to time it perfectly? "
I would say so, as you think the government won their case (the one you denied was happening), when they lost their case. This was widely reported, and you can even go directly to source and read the verdict from the supreme court. But you might prefer "alternative facts" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Andy, I am delusional? Can you explain then how, when 7 or 8 months ago when the government told us they would trigger Article 50 before the end of March, they have managed to time it perfectly?
I would say so, as you think the government won their case (the one you denied was happening), when they lost their case. This was widely reported, and you can even go directly to source and read the verdict from the supreme court. But you might prefer "alternative facts" "
They won the case against the devolved parliaments which prevented any delays. Is that a fact? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Andy, I am delusional? Can you explain then how, when 7 or 8 months ago when the government told us they would trigger Article 50 before the end of March, they have managed to time it perfectly?
I would say so, as you think the government won their case (the one you denied was happening), when they lost their case. This was widely reported, and you can even go directly to source and read the verdict from the supreme court. But you might prefer "alternative facts"
They won the case against the devolved parliaments which prevented any delays. Is that a fact?"
They are asked to make submissions when the case went to the high court, but there was no separate case no. Sorry, I know this is complicated for you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Andy, I am delusional? Can you explain then how, when 7 or 8 months ago when the government told us they would trigger Article 50 before the end of March, they have managed to time it perfectly?
I would say so, as you think the government won their case (the one you denied was happening), when they lost their case. This was widely reported, and you can even go directly to source and read the verdict from the supreme court. But you might prefer "alternative facts"
They won the case against the devolved parliaments which prevented any delays. Is that a fact?
They are asked to make submissions when the case went to the high court, but there was no separate case no. Sorry, I know this is complicated for you."
No, it is just hard for you to admit that the government knew exactly what it was doing and played it perfectly. But hey, who cares. We are there now as promised |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Andy, I am delusional? Can you explain then how, when 7 or 8 months ago when the government told us they would trigger Article 50 before the end of March, they have managed to time it perfectly?
I would say so, as you think the government won their case (the one you denied was happening), when they lost their case. This was widely reported, and you can even go directly to source and read the verdict from the supreme court. But you might prefer "alternative facts"
They won the case against the devolved parliaments which prevented any delays. Is that a fact?
They are asked to make submissions when the case went to the high court, but there was no separate case no. Sorry, I know this is complicated for you.
No, it is just hard for you to admit that the government knew exactly what it was doing and played it perfectly. But hey, who cares. We are there now as promised "
They played it perfectly by losing at the high court and at the supreme court? Ok, whatever you need to tell yourself |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would "
I think blinder is possibly the wrong word but they have done well to remain on track for the date they set despite all the efforts to derail it. Maybe they made accurate predictions as to what were going to be the obstacles and already set out a plan to deal with them without affecting the end result.
In otherwords maybe they know what they are doing. As implied by someone else, they knew they had to lose battles to win the war. All in the time frame set.
Actually I take it back. They played a blinder |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
I think blinder is possibly the wrong word but they have done well to remain on track for the date they set despite all the efforts to derail it. Maybe they made accurate predictions as to what were going to be the obstacles and already set out a plan to deal with them without affecting the end result.
In otherwords maybe they know what they are doing. As implied by someone else, they knew they had to lose battles to win the war. All in the time frame set.
Actually I take it back. They played a blinder "
thank you |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash "
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"All my British shares are doing shit at moment and I'm keen to unload them before the shit really hits the fan
You've got the wrong shares then. My companies shares are flying
Did you buy yours during the recession? But are shares an indicator of the economy or the company?"
That's a difficult one to truly answer, as it could be both or neither or a mixture of things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster."
Well us kippers were told the distaste would strike us the day after the vote to leave. That the lights would go off shares would crash jobs would disappear.
Nowt happened, life went on as normal shares went up, building sites boomed, properties keep selling
I've managed to buy and sell 4 since the vote with no real issues apart from a small increase in material costs
So I doubt I will be running around cock in hand wanking furiously because article 50 has been triggered
Right it's time to book another holiday work is booming life is good family is doing well and we are still leaving the economic union |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash "
I seem to remember it was the UK who bailed Eire out when it crashed after eating too much out of the Euro trough, and building properties which no one wanted or couldnt afford to buy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Whatever, the government has played a blinder to get past the court cases, the amendments, the attempts at derailment, to be able to trigger A50 at the time they wanted to and the time they said they would
I think blinder is possibly the wrong word but they have done well to remain on track for the date they set despite all the efforts to derail it. Maybe they made accurate predictions as to what were going to be the obstacles and already set out a plan to deal with them without affecting the end result.
In otherwords maybe they know what they are doing. As implied by someone else, they knew they had to lose battles to win the war. All in the time frame set.
Actually I take it back. They played a blinder "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
Right it's time to book another holiday work is booming life is good family is doing well and we are still leaving the economic union"
don't choose somewhere abroad... you might find ya money doesn't quite stretch as far as it did this time last year......... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
I seem to remember it was the UK who bailed Eire out when it crashed after eating too much out of the Euro trough, and building properties which no one wanted or couldnt afford to buy"
I'm not saying that my fellow countrymen were not absolutely retarded in their greedy dealings. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster."
Part of the problem, is the pound is slowly declining against the euro the past week and my shares with them. Need to dump them then wait for an opportune moment once things get worse |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster.
Part of the problem, is the pound is slowly declining against the euro the past week and my shares with them. Need to dump them then wait for an opportune moment once things get worse "
I really do believe there will be a Black Wednesday moment in around a years time and I think uniquely the pound and the shares will all drop in shock. Think about it, the Govt won't wait two years to crash out if they think it won't work, they will just jump ship unannounced and they can do that now because they have just over-ridden Parliamentary oversight. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster.
Part of the problem, is the pound is slowly declining against the euro the past week and my shares with them. Need to dump them then wait for an opportune moment once things get worse
I really do believe there will be a Black Wednesday moment in around a years time and I think uniquely the pound and the shares will all drop in shock. Think about it, the Govt won't wait two years to crash out if they think it won't work, they will just jump ship unannounced and they can do that now because they have just over-ridden Parliamentary oversight. "
Its funny, for weeks we've been hearing from the financial geniuses on here that shares have risen because the pound has dropped. Now the pound will drop and shares will drop too?
Anyway, they really should just jump ship, the sooner the better. Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster.
Part of the problem, is the pound is slowly declining against the euro the past week and my shares with them. Need to dump them then wait for an opportune moment once things get worse
I really do believe there will be a Black Wednesday moment in around a years time and I think uniquely the pound and the shares will all drop in shock. Think about it, the Govt won't wait two years to crash out if they think it won't work, they will just jump ship unannounced and they can do that now because they have just over-ridden Parliamentary oversight.
Its funny, for weeks we've been hearing from the financial geniuses on here that shares have risen because the pound has dropped. Now the pound will drop and shares will drop too?
Anyway, they really should just jump ship, the sooner the better. Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind"
What are they?
And shares and currency does drop together when there is a huge economic shock. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
"
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster.
Part of the problem, is the pound is slowly declining against the euro the past week and my shares with them. Need to dump them then wait for an opportune moment once things get worse
I really do believe there will be a Black Wednesday moment in around a years time and I think uniquely the pound and the shares will all drop in shock. Think about it, the Govt won't wait two years to crash out if they think it won't work, they will just jump ship unannounced and they can do that now because they have just over-ridden Parliamentary oversight. "
However even if that happen what difference would it make ?. Shares are a long term investment and any drops iron themselves out over time . It would only present a problem to those who attempted to time the market .
To date shares have never not recovered after a sharp drop.
Any drop in the value of the pound simply makes our exports a lot more effective .
A recent article in the Sunday Telegraph discussed the possible economic benefits of a further drop in the value of the £ and whether it might encourage more businnesses to return manufacturing businneses to the UK.
If we take a ten year view we have nothing to worry about . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster.
Well us kippers were told the distaste would strike us the day after the vote to leave. That the lights would go off shares would crash jobs would disappear.
Nowt happened, life went on as normal shares went up, building sites boomed, properties keep selling
I've managed to buy and sell 4 since the vote with no real issues apart from a small increase in material costs
So I doubt I will be running around cock in hand wanking furiously because article 50 has been triggered
Right it's time to book another holiday work is booming life is good family is doing well and we are still leaving the economic union"
Thats because Cameron said he'd trigger A50 the next day. He didnt so the consequences of triggering didnt happen either. Its like if you dont press on the accelerator in your car, it wont go anywhere if you dont. That doesnt mean the car wont move. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
I seem to remember it was the UK who bailed Eire out when it crashed after eating too much out of the Euro trough, and building properties which no one wanted or couldnt afford to buy"
They even had to discuss demolishing some of the partly built estates . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
I seem to remember it was the UK who bailed Eire out when it crashed after eating too much out of the Euro trough, and building properties which no one wanted or couldnt afford to buy They even had to discuss demolishing some of the partly built estates . "
Which of course they never did. Stupid leprechaun economics. Best of all is that we are back to our old tricks
Pat your magic long term view of shares is waaaay to simplistic.
What if you held yahoo or any other failed business for 10 years? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
I seem to remember it was the UK who bailed Eire out when it crashed after eating too much out of the Euro trough, and building properties which no one wanted or couldnt afford to buy They even had to discuss demolishing some of the partly built estates .
Which of course they never did. Stupid leprechaun economics. Best of all is that we are back to our old tricks
Pat your magic long term view of shares is waaaay to simplistic.
What if you held yahoo or any other failed business for 10 years? "
However you would need to have a balanced Portfolio in order to balance things out .
If you hold twenty sets of shares over ten years you had a portfolio worth £100, 000 three of the sets might go bust and you have lost £15,000. However if your three winning sets go up fourfold you have gained £45000 leaving a net gain of £30000. You remaining shares migbt double .
Every investor has a different attitude to risk. You have to decide what is best for you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
I seem to remember it was the UK who bailed Eire out when it crashed after eating too much out of the Euro trough, and building properties which no one wanted or couldnt afford to buy They even had to discuss demolishing some of the partly built estates .
Which of course they never did. Stupid leprechaun economics. Best of all is that we are back to our old tricks
Pat your magic long term view of shares is waaaay to simplistic.
What if you held yahoo or any other failed business for 10 years? However you would need to have a balanced Portfolio in order to balance things out .
If you hold twenty sets of shares over ten years you had a portfolio worth £100, 000 three of the sets might go bust and you have lost £15,000. However if your three winning sets go up fourfold you have gained £45000 leaving a net gain of £30000. You remaining shares migbt double .
Every investor has a different attitude to risk. You have to decide what is best for you. "
I received a message from you some months ago telling me that your profiles had been banned? First big surprise is why anyone would have profiles as opposed to a profile? So, now you are back and already I have seen two different profiles?? What are you doing that needs multiple profiles and why does your profile or profiles get banned?
Should we call you Pat the Phoenix? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
I seem to remember it was the UK who bailed Eire out when it crashed after eating too much out of the Euro trough, and building properties which no one wanted or couldnt afford to buy They even had to discuss demolishing some of the partly built estates .
Which of course they never did. Stupid leprechaun economics. Best of all is that we are back to our old tricks
Pat your magic long term view of shares is waaaay to simplistic.
What if you held yahoo or any other failed business for 10 years? However you would need to have a balanced Portfolio in order to balance things out .
If you hold twenty sets of shares over ten years you had a portfolio worth £100, 000 three of the sets might go bust and you have lost £15,000. However if your three winning sets go up fourfold you have gained £45000 leaving a net gain of £30000. You remaining shares migbt double .
Every investor has a different attitude to risk. You have to decide what is best for you.
I received a message from you some months ago telling me that your profiles had been banned? First big surprise is why anyone would have profiles as opposed to a profile? So, now you are back and already I have seen two different profiles?? What are you doing that needs multiple profiles and why does your profile or profiles get banned?
Should we call you Pat the Phoenix?"
Our of politeness and consideration I fowarded royou a list of all the members visiting the holiday resort of Cap d Agde. This was a listing which you had previously maintained and I keep on a profile for that purpose
You seem to have an issue with accepting good economic news or anyone commentung that a lower currrency rate means exports are more competitively priced.
I do not wish to discuss the contents of a personal email which I sent to you in order to let you know who aas travelling to a holiday resort. If you had a query you should have sent a message.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up "
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine "
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine "
With all due respect, that is a pile of wishful thinking on your part that has no bearing on anything factual. It also fails to answer the question that was asked of you which was about the huge economic benefits now available???
You have made declarative statements about what you think this new generous conservative reincarnation is going to do. You also failed to address your own question about why none of your wish list had been attempted before and merely passed it off as being "because of the EU."
As your school teacher must have said you...
"Must try harder" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster.
Part of the problem, is the pound is slowly declining against the euro the past week and my shares with them. Need to dump them then wait for an opportune moment once things get worse
I really do believe there will be a Black Wednesday moment in around a years time and I think uniquely the pound and the shares will all drop in shock. Think about it, the Govt won't wait two years to crash out if they think it won't work, they will just jump ship unannounced and they can do that now because they have just over-ridden Parliamentary oversight. However even if that happen what difference would it make ?. Shares are a long term investment and any drops iron themselves out over time . It would only present a problem to those who attempted to time the market .
To date shares have never not recovered after a sharp drop.
Any drop in the value of the pound simply makes our exports a lot more effective .
A recent article in the Sunday Telegraph discussed the possible economic benefits of a further drop in the value of the £ and whether it might encourage more businnesses to return manufacturing businneses to the UK.
If we take a ten year view we have nothing to worry about . "
“Any drops iron themselves out?” How are those shares in Woolworths doing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt"
Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required. "
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the latest? Going to the Queen tomorrow? Then what?
I just need to know when the pound will crash
Not sure the pound will crash again, it would have done that today when May definitively announced she would sign it.
The pound will probably fall again as the clusterfuck starts to unravel over the next 12 months or so. Especially when the Press start to ramp up the anti EU rhetoric because the other 27 won't bow the will of the British people. I reckon there will be a Black Wednesday moment in about a years time when our exit from the EU is announced overnight, without a deal.
Then watch the Kippers, the racists and fuckwits start running around cock in hand masturbating furiously at the prospect of impending economic disaster.
Part of the problem, is the pound is slowly declining against the euro the past week and my shares with them. Need to dump them then wait for an opportune moment once things get worse
I really do believe there will be a Black Wednesday moment in around a years time and I think uniquely the pound and the shares will all drop in shock. Think about it, the Govt won't wait two years to crash out if they think it won't work, they will just jump ship unannounced and they can do that now because they have just over-ridden Parliamentary oversight. However even if that happen what difference would it make ?. Shares are a long term investment and any drops iron themselves out over time . It would only present a problem to those who attempted to time the market .
To date shares have never not recovered after a sharp drop.
Any drop in the value of the pound simply makes our exports a lot more effective .
A recent article in the Sunday Telegraph discussed the possible economic benefits of a further drop in the value of the £ and whether it might encourage more businnesses to return manufacturing businneses to the UK.
If we take a ten year view we have nothing to worry about .
“Any drops iron themselves out?” How are those shares in Woolworths doing?"
The would be wothless. However only a fool would put all their eggs in one basket . Depending on the portfolio mix it may contain a few companiees that go bust . Does thst matter because with a diversified mix a few large gains will cover that and make gains beside .
To be on the safe side you do need to take a twenty year view .
Over time and with the power of conpounding investments in shares have performed better than housing . Any short term movements should be ignored . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine "
What nonsense is this? Multi nationals are protectionist? No, theyre multi nationals, they want to export and import because theyre multi nationals. Clues in the name.
The UK will succeed because they cant afford to fail? This reads like a bullshit motivational quote from that unemployed friend you try to to avoid because theyre trying to get you to buy in to some pyramid scheme.
And your route to success has already been done by the Irish government who are very much a part of the EU. But that plan is based on the Tories investing huge amounts in training and education and providing capital and finance to firms. How likely are the tories to go on a soending spree,particularly for education? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine "
You clearly said
" Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
"
I didn't say that, you did, i didn't make you type that and only a fool would declare such a statment without the ability to back it up.
To state huge economic benefits would in my mind mean these huge benefits far out weigh the negatives , yes ? Or are the positives huge but the negatives gigantic, colossal beyond imagination, totally dwarfing the "huge" benefits?
Now you've been called out on this statement you're doing a massive u turn on what you posted saying how can you prove something that hasn't happened yet, even though you stated their available now to us, WTF ! .....quite a popular theme with you really.
"behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? "
Speak for yourself, you have no idea about me so please don't drag me down to your self proclaimed level of intelligence.
They will know more of the ins and outs of the inner workings of their field of work but that has no bearing of their or my level of intelligence but I'll happily let you set yourself at this lower level of intelligence if that suits you.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thats right guys, think positive "
was that something the Captain of the Titanic was echoing as it went under..?
not suggesting that post Brexit we will be in the same boat and sincerely hope not but with such as we have with the uncertainty and the lack of a coherent plan then maybe 'stay positive' should be added to with 'and be realistic also'..?
always been a believer in being positive but that does not mean living in la la land and ignoring reality..
the mantra of 'stay positive' from those who appear are only seeing lovely fluffy bunnies and some sort of nirvana only they individually imagine is 'interesting'..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? "
To be in control of our own destiny. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? To be in control of our own destiny. "
Oh, good grief.
We don't even have a PM we elected here in the UK. And that PM attempted to appeal the court ruling protecting our parliamentary sovereignty!
So far, Pat, you have basically demonstrated that the 'destiny' you want it the control to be able to dismantle environmental and safety protections we currently have.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? To be in control of our own destiny. "
A commendable goal but given just under half the country who voted wanted in and just over who voted got the out decision and then there's those who didn't participate..
for those who voted out let alone those who are going to be doing the business on our behalf there are many different wants, don't wants and red lines etc..
all very subjective and uncertain.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thats right guys, think positive
Why is it that it always seems to be the brexiters who cant back up their point of view around here?  "
Because points of view can't be backed up. But as far as FACTS go, who's been right so far? Ye but we've not left yet blah blah blah blah blah |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Thats right guys, think positive
Why is it that it always seems to be the brexiters who cant back up their point of view around here?
Because points of view can't be backed up. But as far as FACTS go, who's been right so far? Ye but we've not left yet blah blah blah blah blah"
Of course points of view can be backed up. I look at the situation, I look at the likely and possible events that will follow based on evidence and what information there is and thats what forms my points of view. And if I cant do that then theres no point of view to hold.
I have no idea what you had for lunch and no information on what that was likely to be so I have no point of view on it. With Brexit theres clearly information available, theres a limited number of patha this will go down and I can make my assessment based off that. I have no trouble backing up my point of view on Brexit with sound reasoning. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The problem is some people spout off crap stating its true then when asked to support their "facts" they perform a u-turn, over and over again.
I am not short sighted as to deny there CAN be benefits in leaving the EU , I've posted it before that I was thinking of voting FOR Brexit before the referendum.
BUT after researching the pros and cons from independent sources over losing free trade vs WTO rules, customs union and everything else associated with breaking away from the EU depending how hard Brexit might be, given there is NO data that can even start to suggest we'd be any better off other than the brexit bus 350 million tgat was bullshit anyway I came to the view the risks for the country & economy leaving the EU far outweighed the possible benefits. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Brexit is most probably the highest stakes gamble of our lifetime , and one with possibly catastrophic consequences one one hand or maybe we'll be a bit better off on the other.
Bring on the brexit crash
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? To be in control of our own destiny.
Oh, good grief.
We don't even have a PM we elected here in the UK. And that PM attempted to appeal the court ruling protecting our parliamentary sovereignty!
So far, Pat, you have basically demonstrated that the 'destiny' you want it the control to be able to dismantle environmental and safety protections we currently have.
-Matt"
Not true.
The only people that voted for Theresa May were her Maidenhead constituents.
In a General Election, we don't vote for a Prime Minister we vote for the candidate that we think best to represent us.
It could well turn out that the leader of that party, and by definition the PM, might not even get elected to parliament. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? To be in control of our own destiny.
Oh, good grief.
We don't even have a PM we elected here in the UK. And that PM attempted to appeal the court ruling protecting our parliamentary sovereignty!
So far, Pat, you have basically demonstrated that the 'destiny' you want it the control to be able to dismantle environmental and safety protections we currently have.
-Matt"
Hello. That is a rather strange comment to make . What I actually said was that the safety measures required should be in proportion to the associated risks .
In one of your comments you appear to have confused CPD training with safety ( as did another poster ). I am probably more safety orientated than most people and have for example done an advanced driving course .
What I want to ensure is that safety risks are not over stated . In any event I can make my own assessment of the risk , I do not need someone else telling me whst they are .
To date I have not come to any harm from handling asbestos of week killer . My father was extremely safety conscious and passed the same criteria to me . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? To be in control of our own destiny.
Oh, good grief.
We don't even have a PM we elected here in the UK. And that PM attempted to appeal the court ruling protecting our parliamentary sovereignty!
So far, Pat, you have basically demonstrated that the 'destiny' you want it the control to be able to dismantle environmental and safety protections we currently have.
-Matt
Hello. That is a rather strange comment to make . What I actually said was that the safety measures required should be in proportion to the associated risks .
In one of your comments you appear to have confused CPD training with safety ( as did another poster ). I am probably more safety orientated than most people and have for example done an advanced driving course .
What I want to ensure is that safety risks are not over stated . In any event I can make my own assessment of the risk , I do not need someone else telling me whst they are .
To date I have not come to any harm from handling asbestos of week killer . My father was extremely safety conscious and passed the same criteria to me . "
Good for you Pat. I'm an IAM member too. I don't see how that stops the power companies from dropping their environmental protections if they are no longer required to do so, or companies selling less efficient or less-safe house boilers as they are make them cheaper. All of these are reasons you've stated you want out of the EU.
But you want control of your 'destiny'. Sure, go ahead.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? To be in control of our own destiny.
Oh, good grief.
We don't even have a PM we elected here in the UK. And that PM attempted to appeal the court ruling protecting our parliamentary sovereignty!
So far, Pat, you have basically demonstrated that the 'destiny' you want it the control to be able to dismantle environmental and safety protections we currently have.
-Matt
Hello. That is a rather strange comment to make . What I actually said was that the safety measures required should be in proportion to the associated risks .
In one of your comments you appear to have confused CPD training with safety ( as did another poster ). I am probably more safety orientated than most people and have for example done an advanced driving course .
What I want to ensure is that safety risks are not over stated . In any event I can make my own assessment of the risk , I do not need someone else telling me whst they are .
To date I have not come to any harm from handling asbestos of week killer . My father was extremely safety conscious and passed the same criteria to me .
Good for you Pat. I'm an IAM member too. I don't see how that stops the power companies from dropping their environmental protections if they are no longer required to do so, or companies selling less efficient or less-safe house boilers as they are make them cheaper. All of these are reasons you've stated you want out of the EU.
But you want control of your 'destiny'. Sure, go ahead.
-Matt"
Should you be compelled to install an energy efficient boiler ? If you are not at the house very often it may not matter if the boiler is inefficient . What about all the resources used in manufacturing the new boilers . ? The lifetime of a modern condensing boiler is a lot less than that of a conventional boiler.
My other concern is that a lot of data on climate warming has been manipulated.
The EU want to ban Glyphos . If there was a cancer risk associated with it farmers would have higher than average rates of cancer as they handle it in large quanties. This is not the case .Any ban will mean that it would not be possible for farms to plant crops in a one pass operation and consequently by having to plough s in the use of diesel will be doubled as will manpower costs.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"
Anyone who can't see the huge economic benefits that are now available is blind
What are they?
Now this will be interesting to read
If the economic benefits that are NOW available to us are so good and obviously far far out weigh all the possible negatives that we'd be blind not to see them.... then there has to be concrete proof somewhere they can point to that backs up this rather bold statement.
I do hope they can, I'd love to read the data and then fully throw my support behind Brexit.
Unless it's just we can trade with anyone we want in the some distant future line that's going to be rolled out again.
No, surely not, there has to be something almost tangible to back this up
How can you provide concrete proof of something that hasn't yet happened?
Ask yourself why the government are so keen to push this through? Could it be because they can see the benefits and behind the scenes they are being advised by people a lot more intelligent than you or I? Of course a lot of the success will depend on what the government does but they have been given a mandate to do whatever it takes and are now free to do so and they will because they cannot afford to fail. They will do things which have been resisted by the City dominated treasury for so long. They will rebalance the economy through support for small and medium sized exporters and not be transfixed by the often protectionist multinationals. They will invest in training, education and research and development and actually invest and build infrastructure and not just talk about it. They will provide non equity loans, capital and finance for entrepreneurs, growing firms and the tech sector etc etc etc. Why have they not done all this before? Because they have been unable to because of the EU and have not really needed to.
In short as I say, they cannot afford to fail and the UK will become a better place to live and do business. Of course you will say I am deluded because you cannot see beyond the end of your nose and thats fine
I'm sorry, but that just doesn't add up at all. Why will making trade more cumbersome with our nearest neighbours help small and medium exporters? How do the government plan to help and support these SMEs reach these new markets that are supposedly dying for our trade?
And what had the EU done to prevent us investing in training and development and infrastructure projects?! No, you are just shifting the blame from our successive failing governments to the EU.
-Matt Failing governments ?
If the government have failed why are car sales at an all time high ? In addition the stock exchange is close to an all time high. ? Why can people afford to but lots od expensive cups of cofeee ?We have a great NHS service in addition to a social care system for the vulnerable or less able .
The NHS and social care services could always do with extra funding but to a certain extent you are pouring money into a bottonless pit .
If we wish to tacke the issues referred to above we need to consider charging for use of certain services such as visits to Doctors . And if required train more nurses .
Only yesterday I had to contact social services, a Doctors surgery , environnental health and the local council concerning a complex issue with someones mental health.
i can see no evidence of any of these services failing and the booming economy which we currently have mat be able to providw the extra funding if required.
So if everything is great, why do we need to leave the EU? To be in control of our own destiny.
Oh, good grief.
We don't even have a PM we elected here in the UK. And that PM attempted to appeal the court ruling protecting our parliamentary sovereignty!
So far, Pat, you have basically demonstrated that the 'destiny' you want it the control to be able to dismantle environmental and safety protections we currently have.
-Matt
Hello. That is a rather strange comment to make . What I actually said was that the safety measures required should be in proportion to the associated risks .
In one of your comments you appear to have confused CPD training with safety ( as did another poster ). I am probably more safety orientated than most people and have for example done an advanced driving course .
What I want to ensure is that safety risks are not over stated . In any event I can make my own assessment of the risk , I do not need someone else telling me whst they are .
To date I have not come to any harm from handling asbestos of week killer . My father was extremely safety conscious and passed the same criteria to me . "
'Coming to harm from handling asbestos' does not happen immediately. It can take 40 years or more.
My mum died from mesothelioma. ... Asbestos cancer. She got it diagnosed in 2011, and died in 2013. She never worked with asbestos. My Dad, however, did, ..... In the late 60's, early 70's....and it was from washing his clothes out that she got it. My Dad hasn't got it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
so the logic is, that you're more likely to die from being accidentally stabbed to death by some old lady's knitting needles whilst travelling aboard an aeroplane or falling on your tennants upturned forks on the draining board, than you are from handling asbestos all your working life .... hmmmm, yeah right what planet do you live on?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCCCouple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Thats right guys, think positive
was that something the Captain of the Titanic was echoing as it went under..?
not suggesting that post Brexit we will be in the same boat and sincerely hope not but with such as we have with the uncertainty and the lack of a coherent plan then maybe 'stay positive' should be added to with 'and be realistic also'..?
always been a believer in being positive but that does not mean living in la la land and ignoring reality..
the mantra of 'stay positive' from those who appear are only seeing lovely fluffy bunnies and some sort of nirvana only they individually imagine is 'interesting'..
"
Even Boris said that Brexit was going to be a Titanic success! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Thats right guys, think positive
was that something the Captain of the Titanic was echoing as it went under..?
not suggesting that post Brexit we will be in the same boat and sincerely hope not but with such as we have with the uncertainty and the lack of a coherent plan then maybe 'stay positive' should be added to with 'and be realistic also'..?
always been a believer in being positive but that does not mean living in la la land and ignoring reality..
the mantra of 'stay positive' from those who appear are only seeing lovely fluffy bunnies and some sort of nirvana only they individually imagine is 'interesting'..
Even Boris said that Brexit was going to be a Titanic success! "
Just had to Google that as I never heard that before......
So the success of Brexit has been liken to the sinking of a ship resulting in the deaths of over 1500 people by BoJo who wants us to leave...
How anyone could want to remain after that comforting inspiring prediction is totally beyond me
Have we left yet |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"Thats right guys, think positive
was that something the Captain of the Titanic was echoing as it went under..?
not suggesting that post Brexit we will be in the same boat and sincerely hope not but with such as we have with the uncertainty and the lack of a coherent plan then maybe 'stay positive' should be added to with 'and be realistic also'..?
always been a believer in being positive but that does not mean living in la la land and ignoring reality..
the mantra of 'stay positive' from those who appear are only seeing lovely fluffy bunnies and some sort of nirvana only they individually imagine is 'interesting'..
Even Boris said that Brexit was going to be a Titanic success!
Just had to Google that as I never heard that before......
So the success of Brexit has been liken to the sinking of a ship resulting in the deaths of over 1500 people by BoJo who wants us to leave...
How anyone could want to remain after that comforting inspiring prediction is totally beyond me
Have we left yet "
Don't worry, Boris is currently over in Africa at the moment promoting our auto industry by standing in front of a bunch of Japanese 4x4 ambulances we gave Kenya. At least he has worked out that 'Africa' is not a country. And hopefully they have forgotten his other gaffs about Africans and his colonial views.
Maybe we'll get a trade deal! Maybe a really bold one like New Zealand!
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"It's deffo tuesday the 29th now. Well, wednesday actually
Can you rename the thread? :D"
Wish I could...it was started regarding the vote in parliament that gave the go ahead. Now we know the trigger date the question remains...... OMG! Or About bloody time? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Got a feeling junker is gona say pay up before any negotiations...oh wait he already said "
Suppose somebody has to pay for the vanity project that is the new 'Space Egg' HQ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Got a feeling junker is gona say pay up before any negotiations...oh wait he already said
Suppose somebody has to pay for the vanity project that is the new 'Space Egg' HQ"
yes you will be paying via tax |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Got a feeling junker is gona say pay up before any negotiations...oh wait he already said
Suppose somebody has to pay for the vanity project that is the new 'Space Egg' HQyes you will be paying via tax "
Exactly. And I'm not happy about that are you? In 2011 even Cameron called it a gilded cage for the Eurocrats and a waste in a time of austerity |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
