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

[ramAnag]

It'll all look different when we leave, I remember all the scare mongering when the year 2000 was looming and the world was about to stop!

None so blind as...you and Adi.
Nothing personal...agree with much of what you both say about other things, but on this one...you’re just wrong.
No comparison with the millennium bug...that was always pseudo scientific scaremongering. This isn’t and our wealth and well being is seriously at risk.

[Andy_Faber]

Fact is...the whole concept of Brexit is fundamentally flawed...

Fact is...the whole concept of Brexit is fundamentally flawed. .

The concept isn't flawed, the execution is

I'm coming to the conclusion that the only clean execution that would have been possible would have been 'Hard Brexit', which is the option most people (on BOTH sides) believed they were voting for when they placed their X on the ballot paper back in 2016. Thats why I voted Remain, I considered the balance of good and bad from being WHOLLY 'in' being (slightly, probably about 52/48!) better the good and bad of being WHOLLY 'out'. The Conservatives have shot themselves in the foot by not 'going for it' (Hard Brexit, or at least a very clear 'uncompromising' Brexit) from June 24th, which would have given business the one thing above all they've been craving for - certainty. 2016 - 2018 is still not quite the train wreck that 1995 - 1997 was for the Conservatives, but it has the potential to be so

[ramAnag]

The concept isn't flawed, the execution is

I'm coming to the conclusion that the only clean execution that would have been possible would have been 'Hard Brexit', which is the option most people (on BOTH sides) believed they were voting for when they placed their X on the ballot paper back in 2016. Thats why I voted Remain, I considered the balance of good and bad from being WHOLLY 'in' being (slightly, probably about 52/48!) better the good and bad of being WHOLLY 'out'. The Conservatives have shot themselves in the foot by not 'going for it' (Hard Brexit, or at least a very clear 'uncompromising' Brexit) from June 24th, which would have given business the one thing above all they've been craving for - certainty. 2016 - 2018 is still not quite the train wreck that 1995 - 1997 was for the Conservatives, but it has the potential to be so

Don’t follow that Andy...a) how could people ‘on BOTH sides’ possibly be voting ‘for’ a ‘Hard Brexit’ and b) what evidence is there to suggest that back in June 2016 the electorate was sufficiently informed to understand the differences between the varying forms of Brexit?
The implications were simply not known...the terms ‘hard/no deal’ and ‘soft’ and awareness of the Irish border issue and the Customs Union are aspects that have only been talked about in detail since the Referendum...that is surely the whole point.

As regards the Tory Party...I suspect you’ll have to reconsider your ‘train wreck’ comment after this morning’s news. The Conservative Party is in chaos and has been since the damned Referendum was called to sort out their internal bickering. It is an unholy alliance of right wing wannabes and decent if misguided one nation Tories which shares the same path to self destruction as Brexit. The tragedy is that the Labour Party isn’t sufficiently well led to take advantage. Sooner we abandon the current system and have a centrist Party acting in the national interest the better imo.

As things stand the Brexiteers and the Tories have made our country a laughing stock.

[Andy_Faber]

Don’t follow that Andy...a) how could people ‘on BOTH sides’ possibly be voting ‘for’ a ‘Hard Brexit’ and b) what evidence is there to suggest that back in June 2016 the electorate was sufficiently informed to understand the differences between the varying forms of Brexit?
The implications were simply not known...the terms ‘hard/no deal’ and ‘soft’ and awareness of the Irish border issue and the Customs Union are aspects that have only been talked about in detail since the Referendum...that is surely the whole point.

As regards the Tory Party...I suspect you’ll have to reconsider your ‘train wreck’ comment after this morning’s news. The Conservative Party is in chaos and has been since the damned Referendum was called to sort out their internal bickering. It is an unholy alliance of right wing wannabes and decent if misguided one nation Tories which shares the same path to self destruction as Brexit. The tragedy is that the Labour Party isn’t sufficiently well led to take advantage. Sooner we abandon the current system and have a centrist Party acting in the national interest the better imo.

As things stand the Brexiteers and the Tories have made our country a laughing stock.

Sorry, to clarify, '...most people (on BOTH sides) believed they were voting for (OR AGAINST) when they placed their X on the ballot paper back in 2016

I think you are still missing a trick though, most people genuinely couldn't give a toss about the Irish border or customs union and the outcome 1/2/5/10/50 years down the line is so uncertain I don't think folk are much better 'informed' than before, other than in the art of how not to do a deal

I also think you, along with waaaaay too many people, are bracketing The Conservative Party and 'Brexiteers' together, when they are a very different group (with some crossover), Brexiteers haven't made our country a laughing stock, they merely expressed an opinion which as it happened I disagreed with, but after seeing the way Remainers have acted since 2016 has inclined me more towards their POV. As usual I agree that there has to be a better way than the currrent option of choosing between guffawing toffs and hair shirters, did you vote for Proportional representation? If so, yes, I was the other one

[Geoff Parkstone]

63% of me voted in favour of PR

[MadAmster]

PR is a good idea but not always practical IMO.

By spreading the seats dependent a party's total vote it mirrors, much closer, the will of the people. However, it almost never dilvers a single party government but a coalition of several. It does water down the sharp edges of "right and left" and that can't be bad. However, it can take ages for a coalition to be formed. In the past decade the Dutch have taken 208 days after the election to form a new government and the Belgians 589 days. In that time, the old government carries on but nothing new happens. They merely service existing Laws and Agreements.

Countries are left to tick along and new problems can't be addressed. In occasional cases, a coalition can't be formed and new elections have to be called.

Both PR and "first past the post" elections have pros and cons. I am finally warming to PR as the better option as it excludes extremes.

[ramAnag]

Sorry, to clarify, '...most people (on BOTH sides) believed they were voting for (OR AGAINST) when they placed their X on the ballot paper back in 2016

I think you are still missing a trick though, most people genuinely couldn't give a toss about the Irish border or customs union and the outcome 1/2/5/10/50 years down the line is so uncertain I don't think folk are much better 'informed' than before, other than in the art of how not to do a deal

I also think you, along with waaaaay too many people, are bracketing The Conservative Party and 'Brexiteers' together, when they are a very different group (with some crossover), Brexiteers haven't made our country a laughing stock, they merely expressed an opinion which as it happened I disagreed with, but after seeing the way Remainers have acted since 2016 has inclined me more towards their POV. As usual I agree that there has to be a better way than the currrent option of choosing between guffawing toffs and hair shirters, did you vote for Proportional representation? If so, yes, I was the other one

What an amazing admission! You’ve spent two years criticising Remainers, sometimes justifiably, for having a go at Brexiteers over their lack of understanding.
Now you concede...’most people genuinely couldn’t give a toss about the Irish border or the customs union’...and there, perversely, you have nailed it.
If most people are as you describe...and genuinely ‘couldn’t give a toss’ about those two huge issues and their consequences, then Swale and I, amongst others, have been right all along. The ‘people’ were indeed ignorant of the most relevant facts and the Referendum was flawed from the off.
Sorry Andy, you’re doubtless a lovely guy who, for what it’s worth, I’ve got bags of time for, but you can’t have it both ways and I’m not ‘bracketing the Conservative Party and the Brexiteers together’. It is however an inescapable fact that for close on three years now this country has been held to ransom and made to look utterly ridiculous by infighting between sections of the Tory Party which has led to countless resignations, including at least one PM, God knows how many ministers, two Brexit secretaries, a vote of no confidence in the current PM, a totally wasteful General Election and the Government being found to be in contempt of Parliament.
They should all be deeply ashamed for dragging politics in this country even further into the gutter.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Sorry rA, you're doubtless a lovely guy who, for what it's worth, I've got hags of time for, but you can't have it both ways. If the first referendum is flawed due to the ignorance of the people, a second one will be equally flawed since you cannot educate the uneducatable masses on simple things, let alone complexities that could baffle the average professor.

It is however an inescapable fact that if you can't trust the people the first time round, neither can you the second.

To trust the people to understand the issue, Mr RamAnag, may be regarded as a misfortune: to trust them twice looks like carelessness. (Bracknell, A (sic))

[ramAnag]

DD

Sorry rA, you're doubtless a lovely guy who, for what it's worth, I've got hags of time for, but you can't have it both ways. If the first referendum is flawed due to the ignorance of the people, a second one will be equally flawed since you cannot educate the uneducatable masses on simple things, let alone complexities that could baffle the average professor.

It is however an inescapable fact that if you can't trust the people the first time round, neither can you the second.

To trust the people to understand the issue, Mr RamAnag, may be regarded as a misfortune: to trust them twice looks like carelessness. (Bracknell, A (sic))

Lol...touché Parky!
You’re right of course, it would be most unsatisfactory but is there another alternative?
The politicians are displaying almost as much ignorance as the public - a Brexit Secretary who didn’t understand the importance of Dover/Calais ffs - and much more in the way of self interest.
All that is happening is that virtually everything else is being put on hold while Tory factions trade blows and the leader of the opposition snipes meaninglessly from the side lines.
I’m utterly sick of it but that doesn’t mean jumping off the proverbial cliff just to get things moving.
A referendum got us into this mess, maybe another more carefully thought through one might just get us out. Big risk but how else would you resolve it?

[mistaram]

DD

Lol...touché Parky!
You’re right of course, it would be most unsatisfactory but is there another alternative?
The politicians are displaying almost as much ignorance as the public - a Brexit Secretary who didn’t understand the importance of Dover/Calais ffs - and much more in the way of self interest.
All that is happening is that virtually everything else is being put on hold while Tory factions trade blows and the leader of the opposition snipes meaninglessly from the side lines.
I’m utterly sick of it but that doesn’t mean jumping off the proverbial cliff just to get things moving.
A referendum got us into this mess, maybe another more carefully thought through one might just get us out. Big risk but how else would you resolve it?

RA your right another referendum may get us out of this mess But that depends which polls you believe Most likely hypothetical because it's unlikely to happen