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

[MadAmster]

yes agreed but I don't think they are doing that very well

Difficult to argue with the detail when even the government isn't aware what the detail is.............

[Andy_Faber]

Lol...you really have misinterpreted me and I’m really not...I’m actually much more of a glass half empty hard bitten realist which does me few favours.
Maybe looking back forty or fifty years I was an idealistic dreamer but the responsibilities of work and parenthood, amongst other things, rapidly kicked all that out of me.
The one thing I may have, along with many others including you, is an acute sense of right and wrong. Haven’t always lived up to it sadly, but it’s not about me and the ‘what ifs’ you refer to are, imo, observations that are entirely practical and objections that are completely objective.

I continue to question the following...
1) The Referendum was originally introduced to settle a Tory Party squabble and remains a source of Tory infighting which has nothing to do with the national interest.
2) The Brexit campaign was dominated by lies, misinformation and the breaking of electoral rules. Under such circumstances why should we follow the result which over 60% of the electorate have never voted for?
3) The nation is becoming increasingly paralysed, in political, social and financial terms, as a result of the uncertainty that surrounds Brexit. There are more than enough business leaders, who certainly know more about such matters than me, who are increasingly opposed to Brexit. I’d rather listen to them than any number of half baked, hypocritical, back stabbing politicians whose prime motive is one of self interest.

Does that sound like idealism to you? I don’t think so but...unlike you it increasingly seems...I do know where I stand.
As July slips into August...who will you be voting for this month?

No you have me wrong, I've been in the 'lets get on with it' camp since 24/6/2016

I think in respect of Q3, you need to get out more, unlike you I do literally see both sides of the argument due to my somewhat diverse life in the 'gig' economy, one day with fellahs who's cufflinks are worth more than my house, the next with guys who aspire to my 08 Transit Connect because it has electric windows. There is very little movement in stance anywhere up and down the pecking order, and what unites is a frustration not at the outcome of the referendum but the dillydallying thereafter

[ramAnag]

No you have me wrong, I've been in the 'lets get on with it' camp since 24/6/2016

I think in respect of Q3, you need to get out more, unlike you I do literally see both sides of the argument due to my somewhat diverse life in the 'gig' economy, one day with fellahs who's cufflinks are worth more than my house, the next with guys who aspire to my 08 Transit Connect because it has electric windows. There is very little movement in stance anywhere up and down the pecking order, and what unites is a frustration not at the outcome of the referendum but the dillydallying thereafter

Not many in the ‘let’s get on with it camp’ thinking of voting for Vince, Andy...think you might be unique!

As regards ‘getting out more’...you work, I’m retired...I accept that, but from the nineteen year old who I provide with regular part time employment to friends and relatives who work in a variety of environments from medical supplies to selling in Europe and the UK I know of no one who is saying...’things have been so much better since 23/6/16...can’t wait till it’s fully operational’. As for friends in Europe...they think we’re insane! After the last two years or so I can only agree.

[Manofpride]

No you have me wrong, I've been in the 'lets get on with it' camp since 24/6/2016

I think in respect of Q3, you need to get out more, unlike you I do literally see both sides of the argument due to my somewhat diverse life in the 'gig' economy, one day with fellahs who's cufflinks are worth more than my house, the next with guys who aspire to my 08 Transit Connect because it has electric windows. There is very little movement in stance anywhere up and down the pecking order, and what unites is a frustration not at the outcome of the referendum but the dillydallying thereafter

Good post and well put!

[ramAnag]

Good post and well put!

By which you mean...’I agree’...but when was it ever a good idea to compound a mistaken decision by rushing things through without questioning the likely outcomes even though I know team Brexit - what’s left of it - would love that.

[ramAnag]

Nice, if uncomfortable, analogy from the rather lovely Rachel Johnson regarding Brexit this morning.

If you’d had a diagnosis of some terminal illness and decided to go down the Dignitas route as a result, only to find sometime later that the diagnosis was actually incorrect...would you just shrug your shoulders and say...’never mind let’s go for the assisted suicide anyway?’

Of course not...food for thought though and while we’re at it...how pissed off must Boris be realising that his sister not only got all the looks but all the common sense aswell?

[Manofpride]

The diagnosis though isn't incorrect. Brexit is the way to go and when we leave the EU you'll see that and the remainers scare tactics will go too! Rachel Johnson got all the looks??? They'll never have you as a judge on a miss world panel!

[Andy_Faber]

Nice, if uncomfortable, analogy from the rather lovely Rachel Johnson regarding Brexit this morning.

If you’d had a diagnosis of some terminal illness and decided to go down the Dignitas route as a result, only to find sometime later that the diagnosis was actually incorrect...would you just shrug your shoulders and say...’never mind let’s go for the assisted suicide anyway?’

Of course not...food for thought though and while we’re at it...how pissed off must Boris be realising that his sister not only got all the looks but all the common sense aswell?

I heard that this am and thought it was pretty crass to be honest. I also thought they sounded like a couple of fishwives arguing over the last bar of soap in the shop, and helped make a good argument for most politicians being men.

[ramAnag]

The diagnosis though isn't incorrect. Brexit is the way to go and when we leave the EU you'll see that and the remainers scare tactics will go too! Rachel Johnson got all the looks??? They'll never have you as a judge on a miss world panel!

It’s all relative MoP...and Boris is her’s...in that respect at least she’s got both the looks and the brains.

To explain and extend the analogy...Brexit is the treatment not the diagnosis. The point is...if the original information was incorrect and misleading - which it undeniably was - and the ‘facts’ were incomplete - which they were - then why should we persist with a treatment that is ultimately harmful and isn’t a second opinion called for?

[swaledale]

The diagnosis though isn't incorrect. Brexit is the way to go and when we leave the EU you'll see that and the remainers scare tactics will go too! Rachel Johnson got all the looks??? They'll never have you as a judge on a miss world panel!

On what basis is Brexit "the way to go"? When those politicians who actively support it and their shady group of backers dare not publish any of their plans for what happens? When one of your ardent supporting politicians says it could be 50 years before the UK sees any benefit, whilst moving his hedge funds HQ to Dublin? At what stage will those who voted for it realise that the majority wont benefit and the ones so heavily backing it actually wont give a flying **** if the Uk economy crashes because they are financially well insulated from the effects and more than that are actually betting financially on that scenario?

Does the common man and woman actually believe that the Johnsons, Ress Moggs , Dysons and Banks of this world actually care what happens to them?

Quite where all this alternative trade is going to come from hasn't been clear and still isn't - I could go on but when people believe something rather than base their judgement on reality there really is no point - the only comfort is that in the end we are likely to finish up with a deal that means we stay in the single market and customs union, a half arsed situation at best but the only realistic option that will stop the economy being stiffed - unless common sense prevails and we have that second vote and that would result in a massive remain majority seeing as a mere 37% of the population actually voted to leave and a good few million of those have actually seen the light.

I have yet to talk to anyone, who voted leave at whatever level in society who can actually articulate why its a good thing.

[MadAmster]

I do wish people would stop using the 37% "stat" as an argument. It is, IMO, disingenuous and merely playing with numbers.

It might mean that 63% of those entitled to vote didn't vote to leave. However, those with a different viewpoint could use exactly the same logic to claim, equally as (in)validly, that 65.27% didn't vote remain.

I have 3 questions aimed at both sides of the discussion :

1. Prior to the referendum were you aware that, according to the Bill/Act making it possible, it was an advisory referendum? Yes/No

2. Prior to the referendum were you aware that Cameron had said, on many occasions, that he would abide by the result? Yes/No

3. Prior to the referendum were you aware that the "winner" would be the camp with 50% + 1 or more of the votes cast? Yes/No

I fully expect the answer to all 3 to be a resounding Yes.

A resounding Yes vote will not indicate that Brexit was the best way forward for the UK. Neither will it indicate the opposite. It should, however, stop all the harping about the validity or otherwise of the vote dependent on how you calculate the result.

[ramAnag]

I do wish people would stop using the 37% "stat" as an argument. It is, IMO, disingenuous and merely playing with numbers.

It might mean that 63% of those entitled to vote didn't vote to leave. However, those with a different viewpoint could use exactly the same logic to claim, equally as (in)validly, that 65.27% didn't vote remain.

I have 3 questions aimed at both sides of the discussion :

1. Prior to the referendum were you aware that, according to the Bill/Act making it possible, it was an advisory referendum? Yes/No

2. Prior to the referendum were you aware that Cameron had said, on many occasions, that he would abide by the result? Yes/No

3. Prior to the referendum were you aware that the "winner" would be the camp with 50% + 1 or more of the votes cast? Yes/No

I fully expect the answer to all 3 to be a resounding Yes.

A resounding Yes vote will not indicate that Brexit was the best way forward for the UK. Neither will it indicate the opposite. It should, however, stop all the harping about the validity or otherwise of the vote dependent on how you calculate the result.

1. Yes...because all referenda in the UK are.
2. Yes...but he was in no position to do so because of the above and in any case he didn’t...he ‘walked’ immediately.
3. Yes...but that does not equate to a democratic decision in a two horse race and I was never aware that ‘winning’, in the terms you suggest, meant anything more than ’here are the feelings of a percentage of the British people’.

The 37% factor is crucial imo, as are the facts that people were lied to and electoral law was broken.
I value you highly as a poster and a person MA, but to follow the decision of a vote that was taken in such circumstances over something so important is both ludicrous and suicidal imo. I second every word of Swales’ post #3550.

[Geoff Parkstone]

rat a tat tat, rat a tat tat again

1. yes
2. yes, Cameron's subsequent decision to resign (although cowardly) has no relevance to the PM pledging to follow the decision of the referendum
3. yes, the question does not allow a "but...."

The 37% factor is just an excuse for mewling in my view. Whilst 37 is not more than 50, it is more than 34 or however many voted to stay. End of. lying to the electorate? I am sure both did, although one eyed views will miss seeing their own side's lies. mame a single election in this country ever where the electorate were not lied to,

PS MA inst going to be following the decision as he is a Cloggie and, as such, best qualified to be impartial on this topic

But the most important question is, will Josefzoon be able to play for us post brexit day, since he will not have the relevant international history for a work permit as would be applied to Asian, African etc imported players

[ramAnag]

rat a tat tat, rat a tat tat again

1. yes
2. yes, Cameron's subsequent decision to resign (although cowardly) has no relevance to the PM pledging to follow the decision of the referendum
3. yes, the question does not allow a "but...."

The 37% factor is just an excuse for mewling in my view. Whilst 37 is not more than 50, it is more than 34 or however many voted to stay. End of. lying to the electorate? I am sure both did, although one eyed views will miss seeing their own side's lies. mame a single election in this country ever where the electorate were not lied to,

PS MA inst going to be following the decision as he is a Cloggie and, as such, best qualified to be impartial on this topic

But the most important question is, will Josefzoon be able to play for us post brexit day, since he will not have the relevant international history for a work permit as would be applied to Asian, African etc imported players

I almost predicted that Parky would call me out for ‘repetition’...just because he repeatedly does.
You’re missing the point though...until the question is answered satisfactorily it remains valid.
Same with everything...the arguments in favour of ending Apartheid and womens’ rights to vote never changed...neither did they become any less valid when those resistant to them repeatedly said...’yeah, yeah...we’ve heard it all before’.
So...someone explain a) how 37% in favour of something represents a democratic majority in a two horse race and b) twenty six months on and knowing what why now know...why Brexit is such a good idea, because until those two questions can be answered satisfactorily I’ll stick to my position thanks.

[Andy_Faber]

I do wish people would stop using the 37% "stat" as an argument. It is, IMO, disingenuous and merely playing with numbers.

It might mean that 63% of those entitled to vote didn't vote to leave. However, those with a different viewpoint could use exactly the same logic to claim, equally as (in)validly, that 65.27% didn't vote remain.

I have 3 questions aimed at both sides of the discussion :

1. Prior to the referendum were you aware that, according to the Bill/Act making it possible, it was an advisory referendum? Yes/No

2. Prior to the referendum were you aware that Cameron had said, on many occasions, that he would abide by the result? Yes/No

3. Prior to the referendum were you aware that the "winner" would be the camp with 50% + 1 or more of the votes cast? Yes/No

I fully expect the answer to all 3 to be a resounding Yes.

A resounding Yes vote will not indicate that Brexit was the best way forward for the UK. Neither will it indicate the opposite. It should, however, stop all the harping about the validity or otherwise of the vote dependent on how you calculate the result.

But regrettably it won't.

Edit: See, told ya!