Page 173 of 174 FirstFirst ... 73123163171172173174 LastLast
Results 3,441 to 3,460 of 3465

Thread: OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

  1. #3441
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,440
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    I wholly accept the point raised by you and Geoff and apologise for any confusion caused. My point was that it is nonsense for certain Brexiteers, in this case Tricky, to continually suggest that to be opposed to Brexit is to be opposed to democracy.

    I’ll not go over the 37% argument again...it’s tedious but very, very relevant and if I lived in Scotland or N. Ireland I would be particularly incensed to be accused of being anti democratic over this particular matter.

    Is there anything to be learned from the Referendum? Yes, of course there is, but just like the Grenfell Tower tragedy, the powers that be have wasted months and now years failing to address them.

    Unlike Tricky I don’t seek a descent into chaos but most reasonable Brexiteers must surely accept that the Referendum was always flawed.

    It was like asking someone with a badly damaged leg whether they wanted their limb removed, or someone with cancer if they want heavy duty chemotherapy, without ever having the discussion regarding possible alternatives and consequences.

    Personally I doubt that I will ever be anything other than opposed to Brexit simply because it seems to be a very, very bad idea for the future of our country but beyond that, people were lied to, electoral rules were allegedly broken and access to the facts was unforthcoming. The conditions for informed decision making were simply not present.

    With all that in mind surely the only solution is either 1) to have another Referendum with people this time being made fully aware of all the consequences and the necessity for a result which actually does reflect a truly democratic result, i.e. the support, one way or another, of a majority of the electorate... or 2) hand the details over to our democratically elected Parliament who could then have a free vote on the content of any deal.

    If ‘Leave’ won in such circumstances I for one would be unlikely to change my mind, but I would also fully accept that the result was a free and fair example of democracy in action and get on with it.
    A robust defence there RA.

    Its still a massively complex issue, although you mention a 'truly democratic' vote. It WAS democratic, but I'd go along with 'better informed' for sure, although 'adequately informed' is a pipedream and possibly helps your argument that the general public should never have been consulted and it should have been left to parliament.

  2. #3442
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy_Faber View Post
    A robust defence there RA.

    Its still a massively complex issue, although you mention a 'truly democratic' vote. It WAS democratic, but I'd go along with 'better informed' for sure, although 'adequately informed' is a pipedream and possibly helps your argument that the general public should never have been consulted and it should have been left to parliament.
    Sorry Andy, I know it’s repetitive...but (as distinct from General Elections)...when you have just two choices then one choice winning the support of a little over one third of the electorate can never equate to a majority which is what democracy, by definition, demands.

  3. #3443
    The thing is though there isn’t an argument! There was a vote to stay or leave. Leave won!

  4. #3444
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,440
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    Sorry Andy, I know it’s repetitive...but (as distinct from General Elections)...when you have just two choices then one choice winning the support of a little over one third of the electorate can never equate to a majority which is what democracy, by definition, demands.
    No it doesn't, not by the definition of UK parliamentary democracy. By statute, the laws of the land are decided by a parliament of elected representatives (lets leave Queenie and the Lords out of it for simplicity). Parliament voted for a referendum - so democracy prevailed. Of those who voted, most voted to leave (Brexit) - but that wasn't binding, and to appease you it wasn't even 'the will of the people' it was a 'message from the people' that parliament could/can choose to ignore if it wishes. The current democratically elected government have made it their policy to proceed with Brexit, and for that matter have decided it will happen without a vote on 'the deal' - that's STILL democracy because the electorate appointed parliament to decide and voted for the current government to 'force the issue'.

    Bear in mind that the government COULD have put to the vote to ignore the referendum. That would STILL have been democracy.

    Your definition, even if I agreed with it which I don't, doesn't represent parliamentary democracy in the UK.

  5. #3445
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy_Faber View Post
    No it doesn't, not by the definition of UK parliamentary democracy. By statute, the laws of the land are decided by a parliament of elected representatives (lets leave Queenie and the Lords out of it for simplicity). Parliament voted for a referendum - so democracy prevailed. Of those who voted, most voted to leave (Brexit) - but that wasn't binding, and to appease you it wasn't even 'the will of the people' it was a 'message from the people' that parliament could/can choose to ignore if it wishes. The current democratically elected government have made it their policy to proceed with Brexit, and for that matter have decided it will happen without a vote on 'the deal' - that's STILL democracy because the electorate appointed parliament to decide and voted for the current government to 'force the issue'.

    Bear in mind that the government COULD have put to the vote to ignore the referendum. That would STILL have been democracy.

    Your definition, even if I agreed with it which I don't, doesn't represent parliamentary democracy in the UK.
    But we abandoned Parliamentary Democracy and - bizarrely in the circumstances - the sovereignty of Parliament as soon as Cameron stupidly settled on a Referendum to settle Tory Party infighting.

    You don’t have to ‘appease’ me...we’re both, I think, thoroughly reasonable people...but you’ve just accepted that the result does not represent the ‘will of the people’, that the result ‘wasn’t binding’ and that, by implication, the only ‘message from the people’ was that there’s a huge split and the people are thoroughly confused...so why plough on regardless despite all the evidence of self inflicted harm?

    As soon as Parliamentary democracy took second place to a Joe Public Referendum there had to be a proper majority - more than 50% of the electorate - for the decision to have any credibility at all as a democratic majority.

  6. #3446
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    2,440
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    But we abandoned Parliamentary Democracy and - bizarrely in the circumstances - the sovereignty of Parliament as soon as Cameron stupidly settled on a Referendum to settle Tory Party infighting.

    You don’t have to ‘appease’ me...we’re both, I think, thoroughly reasonable people...but you’ve just accepted that the result does not represent the ‘will of the people’, that the result ‘wasn’t binding’ and that, by implication, the only ‘message from the people’ was that there’s a huge split and the people are thoroughly confused...so why plough on regardless despite all the evidence of self inflicted harm?

    As soon as Parliamentary democracy took second place to a Joe Public Referendum there had to be a proper majority - more than 50% of the electorate - for the decision to have any credibility at all as a democratic majority.
    No we didn't because as the Remoaners keep pointing out 'it wasn't legally binding', parliamentary democracy stepped back into play when parliament contemplated the result and decided what to do, it could just as easily decided to ignore as accept the result. You might not like it but don't confuse your strongly held sense of fairness with any failure of democracy as UK live it.

  7. #3447
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    ...so why plough on regardless despite all the evidence of self inflicted harm?
    Where (and what) is all this evidence? I would say that it is anecdotal and predictive guesswork, just like the perceived benefits of Brexit are, as opposed to any hard and fast evidence. One person's guess work against another's....

  8. #3448
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone View Post
    Where (and what) is all this evidence? I would say that it is anecdotal and predictive guesswork, just like the perceived benefits of Brexit are, as opposed to any hard and fast evidence. One person's guess work against another's....
    Off the top of my head Geoff...here are just seven, in no particular order, for starters.
    1) The enormous cost which wasn’t accurately identified two years ago.
    2) Trade...the EU is our biggest market, do we really want to abandon it especially given the games Trump is playing.
    3) The rights of ex-pats...aka British migrants to Europe.
    4) The impact on Financial Services where we have been doing rather well.
    5) The possible impact on car manufacturing under new WTO rules.
    6) The impact upon the ‘Open Skies’ agreement in relation to UK fight schedules and British airports.
    7) The impact of new border control legislation on our freedom to travel and especially in relation to the Irish border question...a whole ‘can of worms’ I remember being completely glossed over by Farage and Co. in the lead up to the Referendum.

  9. #3449
    OK, so no evidence, just presumption or long standing known impacts (UK expats in Europe). Trade and impact on financial services is supposition, who knows what the future will hold as we reposition ourselves in an increasingly globalised economy. The cost - well if you believed the estimates first floated pre referendum, then more fool you!!

    #7 ireland was flagged up years ago as an issue, and other inconveniences such as queuing at border control are to be honest a trivial matter for all but the most impatient holidaymaker forced to spend an extra 30 minutes of drinking time in a line.

    #5 and 6 I dont fully follow the problems, but again surely these must have been anticipated pre referendum and are hardly "newly emergent"

    What I am saying here is that there doesnt appear to be anything "new" in your list, and that these factors must have been taken account of already. OK some of the costs might have been undercooked (well its an absolute certainty that they were) but so might some of the benefits. Point is that noone knows or can know if we are better off or not - the remoaners will constantly carp on about how it has to be negative, the brexiteers will point to golden new horizons of emerging markets free from EU protectionism. We just dont know, all we can do is make an educated guess. No evidence - evidence needs to be factually demonstrable

  10. #3450
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone View Post
    OK, so no evidence, just presumption or long standing known impacts (UK expats in Europe). Trade and impact on financial services is supposition, who knows what the future will hold as we reposition ourselves in an increasingly globalised economy. The cost - well if you believed the estimates first floated pre referendum, then more fool you!!

    #7 ireland was flagged up years ago as an issue, and other inconveniences such as queuing at border control are to be honest a trivial matter for all but the most impatient holidaymaker forced to spend an extra 30 minutes of drinking time in a line.

    #5 and 6 I dont fully follow the problems, but again surely these must have been anticipated pre referendum and are hardly "newly emergent"

    What I am saying here is that there doesnt appear to be anything "new" in your list, and that these factors must have been taken account of already. OK some of the costs might have been undercooked (well its an absolute certainty that they were) but so might some of the benefits. Point is that noone knows or can know if we are better off or not - the remoaners will constantly carp on about how it has to be negative, the brexiteers will point to golden new horizons of emerging markets free from EU protectionism. We just dont know, all we can do is make an educated guess. No evidence - evidence needs to be factually demonstrable
    Of course you have a point...there has to be a lot of guesswork involved for the likes of us...and that too is kind of the point.
    No one knew what they were actually voting for and to a large extent, still don’t.
    Funny how the ‘Leavers’ could be so emphatic about how much the NHS could receive each week though...rarely mentioned these days.

  11. #3451
    Did the remainers know what they were voting for?

  12. #3452
    It's not going to be plain sailing, but there are 2 sides to every argument. Just looking at a couple of situations.

    Remainers talk as if trade with the EU would suddenly stop completely. If we had to resort to wto tariffs, because of the depreciation of the pound our prices would still be lower than 2 years ago. Remember goods from the EU would also attract tariffs bringing in greater revenue to our government than we send out.

    My son hears scare stories at JLR about the tariffs hitting car sales in the EU. But JLR is massively outsold in this country by the likes of Audi, VW, Mercedes, BMW, etc. Surely JLR sales will increase in this country when all their competitors have to increase prices.this income for the government could be spent on subsidising industry and /or spending on the NHS.

    As I've said many times, any bad deal will cost the EU more than the UK, but less proportionally. Importantly though, is the fact that the UK tariffs are negated by by the deflation of the pound, whilst eu goods more expensive because of the euro will become even more expensive with tariffs. Businesses throughout the EU are dreading a no deal.

  13. #3453
    Quote Originally Posted by Manofpride View Post
    Did the remainers know what they were voting for?
    Clearly they knew more because they weren’t voting for a journey into the unknown but I take your point and those made by Ram59.
    My point remains that most people were ill informed and misled. For me that brings the validity of the result into question but it makes a pleasant change to argue with with reasonable people on both sides who don’t just deal in rants and accusations.

    P.S. Haven’t JLR just opted to move from the Midlands to Slovakia, Ram?
    Last edited by ramAnag; 14-06-2018 at 07:51 PM.

  14. #3454
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    Clearly they knew more because they weren’t voting for a journey into the unknown but I take your point and those made by Ram59.
    My point remains that most people were ill informed and misled. For me that brings the validity of the result into question but it makes a pleasant change to argue with with reasonable people on both sides who don’t just deal in rants and accusations.

    P.S. Haven’t JLR just opted to move from the Midlands to Slovakia, Ram?
    They're transferring production of the some current vehicles to Slovakia, so they can free up space and labour to produce future electric and hydride vehicles in this country, which is where the future lies.

  15. #3455
    See the Director of the Institute of Fiscal Studies is saying that Maggie May’s pronouncements on the NHS benefitting from a ‘Brexit Dividend’ is...to paraphrase...utter bollux.
    As far as I know the IFS is a politically independent organisation which specialises in ‘doing the maths’. Glad the NHS is getting some more money but I do wish the politicians would stop their shameless lies.

  16. #3456
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    I do wish the politicians would stop their shameless lies.
    I thought it was part of their job description!

  17. #3457
    Quote Originally Posted by Manofpride View Post
    I thought it was part of their job description!
    You’re right of course...but Brexit was caused by the previous Tory PM trying to assert control over his Party and most of the current moves seem to be about the future of the existing PM rather than the future of the country. Fed up of it.

  18. #3458
    Got to admit although I want out, it's turning into a circus with extra clowns. I can't believe whats going on? what a bloody shambles it's turning into!

  19. #3459
    Quote Originally Posted by Manofpride View Post
    Got to admit although I want out, it's turning into a circus with extra clowns. I can't believe whats going on? what a bloody shambles it's turning into!
    You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear MoP and this has been a right pig’s ear from the beginning.

  20. #3460
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    See the Director of the Institute of Fiscal Studies is saying that Maggie May’s pronouncements on the NHS benefitting from a ‘Brexit Dividend’ is...to paraphrase...utter bollux.
    As far as I know the IFS is a politically independent organisation which specialises in ‘doing the maths’. Glad the NHS is getting some more money but I do wish the politicians would stop their shameless lies.
    This is the same director who said a week before the brexit vote that a vote to leave would result in an immediate fall in the stock market, a fall in investment and employment etc. He may be independent, but his ability to forecast is as bad as everyone else.

    BTW, May is claiming that only part of the money will come from brexit and tax increases will have to be paid for the rest.

Page 173 of 174 FirstFirst ... 73123163171172173174 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •