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

[MadAmster]

Barclay is still in position. David (I wanna be PM) Davis quit because he appears to have the opposite of the ‘Midas touch’ in everything he becomes involved in and as far as I remember, Raab quit after making some idiotic comment about misunderstanding the importance of Dover to the UK.

Raab and Davis have been high profile leading Brexiteers throughout in an evenly balanced though, imo, utterly inept Cabinet so I don’t really understand your point. They certainly haven’t held back in their very public criticism of May’s leadership.

The point being that, instead of going hell for leather towards aproper Brexit they were forced to work within the May parameters of "preferably no Bexit at all or at worst BRINO". Not what the 3 of them wanted and therefore they resigned.

It's all a typical Brussels stitch up. No country has ever "got away" with voting against what "Brussels" wants in a referendum. For evidence look at Ireland, the Netherlands twice etc.

[ramAnag]

The point being that, instead of going hell for leather towards aproper Brexit they were forced to work within the May parameters of "preferably no Bexit at all or at worst BRINO". Not what the 3 of them wanted and therefore they resigned.

It's all a typical Brussels stitch up. No country has ever "got away" with voting against what "Brussels" wants in a referendum. For evidence look at Ireland, the Netherlands twice etc.

They were hardly ‘forced to work within the May parameters’ were they? They had to work within the parameters dictated by those rules defined by what we, the UK, had signed up and committed to.

What’s wrong with that? It’s what membership of pretty much all organisations requires and the alternative is the sort of selective anarchy that the likes of Farage and the ERG appear to specialise in.

What’s a ‘proper Brexit’ by the way?

[MadAmster]

They were hardly ‘forced to work within the May parameters’ were they? They had to work within the parameters dictated by those rules defined by what we, the UK, had signed up and committed to.

What’s wrong with that? It’s what membership of pretty much all organisations requires and the alternative is the sort of selective anarchy that the likes of Farage and the ERG appear to specialise in.

What’s a ‘proper Brexit’ by the way?

A proper one is leaving on terms based on a properly negotiated basis. Coming up with your own negotiating stance and fighting your corner. Not letting the EU come up with 99% of the wording of all documents. Not taking over 2 years to come up with a stance that you know the EU aren't going to accept. They had already decided what their terms were.

IMO, May et al basically sat on their hands doing sweet FA for 2 years leaving all of the preparatory work to the EU. The EU came to a decision and it was take it or leave it, basically. That suited May as, depsite 2 years of Brexit means Brexit and there will be no freedom of movement/Customs Union/Single market, they discovered it was actually No Brexit, BRINO or No deal. I blame May and the Tories for the current situation which is down to their lack of activity.

What is on the table is Brexit or BRINO.

[swaledale]

A proper one is leaving on terms based on a properly negotiated basis. Coming up with your own negotiating stance and fighting your corner. Not letting the EU come up with 99% of the wording of all documents. Not taking over 2 years to come up with a stance that you know the EU aren't going to accept. They had already decided what their terms were.

IMO, May et al basically sat on their hands doing sweet FA for 2 years leaving all of the preparatory work to the EU. The EU came to a decision and it was take it or leave it, basically. That suited May as, depsite 2 years of Brexit means Brexit and there will be no freedom of movement/Customs Union/Single market, they discovered it was actually No Brexit, BRINO or No deal. I blame May and the Tories for the current situation which is down to their lack of activity.

What is on the table is Brexit or BRINO.

Don't believe all you read in the press owned by the mega rich elite! I happen to know, through a close acquaintance that an awful lot of work was done on the deal - its hardly May's, she may be fronting it, but the deal was negotiated as always by others (i.e. people who know how to negotiate).

Secondly, the deal was just the withdrawal agreement, it settled nothing about customs union/free movement/single market the actual deal post Brexit would be negotiated in the transition period following our departure - it does rather take some time to disentangle over 40 years of agreements and treaties, a point not exactly dwelled upon by those pushing Brexit!

The statistic about the majority of areas voting leave is meaningless and misleading - it was a referendum (advisory as well but hey ho) and the winning margin was very close and what Brexit would mean was never ever explained, quite the opposite in fact - the leave side claimed we would be able to leave the club and still enjoy the benefits we had in it, because the EU would be desperate for us not to leave without a good deal.

That as it happened wasn't the case, but the type of Brexit deal negotiated has to reflect the fact that 48% of the people didn't vote for it after all thats democracy.

Mind you when I hear leavers say things like - "We need to leave without a deal, the EU requires there to be a vet in every abattoir, we can't afford that!" Then I know the vast majority haven't got a ****ing clue!

If there is any blame for the current fiasco it lies with the arch Brexiteers in the Tory party and that bunch bigots known as the DUP!

[MadAmster]

If there is any blame for the current fiasco it lies with the arch Brexiteers in the Tory party and that bunch bigots known as the DUP!

Total agreement there Swale. The whole thing was dreamt up to try to mend the splits in the Tory party. It failed and led to the mess we have today.

[ramAnag]

Total agreement there Swale. The whole thing was dreamt up to try to mend the splits in the Tory party. It failed and led to the mess we have today.

Glad you agree with that MA...me too. Just puzzled how you can recognise that and still imply your support for a ‘proper Brexit’.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Glad you agree with that MA...me too. Just puzzled how you can recognise that and still imply your support for a ‘proper Brexit’.

Just because a bunch of arseholes agree with what you think doesn't mean you (a) shouldn't still hold your beliefs (b) align yourself with those arseholes on other matters.

For example, I agree with Corbyn's stance on the Chagos Islands, but that doesn't mean I'd vote for him!

[ramAnag]

Just because a bunch of arseholes agree with what you think doesn't mean you (a) shouldn't still hold your beliefs (b) align yourself with those arseholes on other matters.

For example, I agree with Corbyn's stance on the Chagos Islands, but that doesn't mean I'd vote for him!

I agree GP, but if you believe - as MA obviously does - that the whole notion of a Brexit Referendum was ‘dreamt up to try and mend the splits in the Tory Party’ then why would you ever support a ‘proper Brexit’?

The interests of the Tory Party are not the same as the National Interest. As a mechanism for uniting the Tories Brexit has been a spectacular failure. I very much doubt that anyone as intelligent as I believe ‘Amster to be can believe that Brexit will be anything other than an equally spectacular disaster for the country no matter how much he may mistrust aspects of the EU.

[MadAmster]

rA, I am totally against the EU and have said why on a couple of occasions. It's no more than the next step to totalitarianism with, both financially and politically, more and more wealth, power and influence going to an ever smaller group of people.

It's not a world I wish to see.

[ramAnag]

rA, I am totally against the EU and have said why on a couple of occasions. It's no more than the next step to totalitarianism with, both financially and politically, more and more wealth, power and influence going to an ever smaller group of people.

It's not a world I wish to see.

Although you have said before that, while you are totally against the possible USoE aspect of the EU you are very much in favour of the old EEC alliance.
My point is that to support what you refer to as a ‘proper Brexit’ would involve throwing out all the economic and trading aspects of the EEC/EU that you respect and that this would damage the UK all in the name of, as you yourself agree, a plan ‘dreamt up to mend the splits in the Tory Party’.

[swaledale]

rA, I am totally against the EU and have said why on a couple of occasions. It's no more than the next step to totalitarianism with, both financially and politically, more and more wealth, power and influence going to an ever smaller group of people.

It's not a world I wish to see.

Nor one I want either, yet in fact the Eu actually represents the opposite, national governments working together with the power to control or at least reduce the all enveloping power of the big corporations and the faceless mega rich individuals who are behind them!

Your overlooking the fact that as mall group of very wealthy people already control and influence life in the UK and leaving the Eu is what they want, now why wouldthey want that if it served their aims?

I can't really see how multi national elected representatives are totalitarianism? Quite the opposite I would say, indeed the wonder of the Eu is that with the pressures of domestic politics on the politicians that it works in any sense yet it does and so many good things come out of it, which we in the Uk enjoy, its a shame people don't understand that.

What your espousing is a reduction and control over capitalism, a worthy aim but one which sadly most people don't seem to want to support, but I suspect a number of external issues will ultimately bring it down and those who prosper from it - after all their wealth going to do the billionaires any good if the planet is unable to support human life is it?

Yes the EU is far from perfect, but what institution or organisation run by human being is? But its not by defintion an "evil" institution, I'd say its probably around 70-30 positive to negative, but then thats politics, you can't always get what you want and sometimes when you do it ain't what you actually needed!

[swaledale]

Just because a bunch of arseholes agree with what you think doesn't mean you (a) shouldn't still hold your beliefs (b) align yourself with those arseholes on other matters.

For example, I agree with Corbyn's stance on the Chagos Islands, but that doesn't mean I'd vote for him!

The nature of politics is that you make your choice and which politician is least offensive surely? I mean there are many labour policies (unless your in his constituency you can't actually vote for Corbyn!) which I disagree with, but on balance I'd rather have them in power than the Tories any day, yet there are politicians - Kate Hoey for one, who make me cringe in the party. Likewise there are Tories who I have no problem with, but ultimately the Tory party inflicted austerity on the poorest in this country in response to a financial mess that was created by some of the richest!

[MadAmster]

Nor one I want either, yet in fact the Eu actually represents the opposite, national governments working together with the power to control or at least reduce the all enveloping power of the big corporations and the faceless mega rich individuals who are behind them!

Your overlooking the fact that as mall group of very wealthy people already control and influence life in the UK and leaving the Eu is what they want, now why wouldthey want that if it served their aims?

I can't really see how multi national elected representatives are totalitarianism? Quite the opposite I would say, indeed the wonder of the Eu is that with the pressures of domestic politics on the politicians that it works in any sense yet it does and so many good things come out of it, which we in the Uk enjoy, its a shame people don't understand that.

What your espousing is a reduction and control over capitalism, a worthy aim but one which sadly most people don't seem to want to support, but I suspect a number of external issues will ultimately bring it down and those who prosper from it - after all their wealth going to do the billionaires any good if the planet is unable to support human life is it?

Yes the EU is far from perfect, but what institution or organisation run by human being is? But its not by defintion an "evil" institution, I'd say its probably around 70-30 positive to negative, but then thats politics, you can't always get what you want and sometimes when you do it ain't what you actually needed!

I think. for me, the problem is that, whatever you vote, you either get the red Tories or the blue Tories. In the Netherlands we get a right of centre coalition. In both countries this means a Government that is friendly to the 1%. A similar story is true in many other EU countries. The populace elects MPs and the major party provides the Prime Minister. The PMs from across Europe then appoint the members of the Commission. It is the Commission and only the Commission which may but legislation before the European Patliament. The Commission members are all career politicians, many of whom have fallen out of favour in their own country but have been good for the 1% and for the EU. They get these cushy jobs in order to continue that work. The Netherlands always has someone in a top role in the EU because they toe the line and are one of very few net payers to the EU. They cowtow to EU whim. Two referenda went against the EU line. They were, of course, only advisory........ after much navel-gazing the Governments of the day decided to go against the vote. In the 2005 referendum on accepting the new EU Constitution, 61.54% voted not to accept it. The NL acepted the EU Constitution. In the Ukraine Association Treaty referendum, it was 61.1% against. Again the vote was ignored.

Everywhere else that has seen a vote contrary to EU wishes has seen 1 or more reruns of the vote until the required result was reached.

All of the above is fact. No referendum vote against EU Commission wishes has ever led to the result being carried through. It seems impossible to go against the wishes of the EU Commission.

Take all of the above and then add in the view held by many, all over Europe, that politicians are in the pay of the 1%, in the pay of the Multinationals, and you see where anti EU thoughts and actions come from.

If I had had a vote, I would have voted Leave. In the hope that Leave won and that the break would be negotiated rather than surrendered and watered down as it looks like being. In the hope that a UK successful break with the EU would lead others to follow and cause the breakup of the EU as a political animal. I see the Commission as a danger to the will of the people and a step towards more and more centralisation of power to people who were voted out of their own Parliament subsequelntly appointed to the "Cabinet" ruling nearly 30 countries.

I also look at what would happen in Greece, Spain, Italy and other countries if they had UK and NL style tax regimes forced on them complete with the strict controls they have. There would be riots IMO. What they want from life is not the sort of Government influence on life that we know in germany, NL, UK, France etc. They don't want it either. The UK, NL and Germany agree to what they agree with and carry it out. The rest agree to anything just to keep the peace and then ignore the bits they don't like. That, to me, is not how you should act.

I might also be a tad cynical but the EU has been bleeding money for decennia. Billions a year go missing and they know the money came in. They know it isn't there anymore but where did it go? They have no idea. That is why no accountant has ever signed off on the accounts being a true and accurate record. The cynic in me says "why has it taken this long (decennia) and still no answer to where that money goes?". EU back pockets, maybe? Hardly any of the holes through which cash is leaking have been identified and plugged. Why? I have asked the question of a Dutch MEP. She was aware of the fact that the EU hemorrhages money but no idea why/how but was convinced "they were doing all they could" to stop the flow. I got the same answer from a right wing FB group of EU politicians. It is simply not good enough people.

The EU is, indeed, far from perfect. The impression I get is that those in charge are quite happy with that situation it works in their favour. In fact, the rising number of people against the EU from all over the EU is because of the ever increasing power "Brussels" has. People don't like it. The answer to this according to Verhodstadt, Juncker, Tusk et al is MORE "Brussels". How's that for "the will of the people"?

Change is proving nigh on impossible. A breakup or Leaving seems to be the only solution

[ramAnag]

MA, I accept that there is an element of truth in what you say and that the EU is ‘far from perfect’.
Isn’t it though a tad contradictory of you to, one the one hand, claim that the EU is one step away from ‘totalitarianism’ and working on behalf of the 1% while in the next breath you suggest that only ourselves and those in Holland, Germany and (presumably northern) France abide by the rules while those naughty Southern Europeans take us for everything they can get?
You just can’t have it both ways in the same way as you can’t applaud the aims of the EEC and then totally condemn the EU as being the epitome of everything that is wrong with the World.

I have a lot of time for your opinions and none at all for those of Farage. Yesterday Mr. Farage took a grain of truth about a part of the world I know particularly well and then, via a series of lies/gross exaggerations and the fact that he was addressing an American audience with no first hand knowledge of his example at all, proceeded to tell the World a pack of lies in order to further his own agenda.

I would never accuse you of lying but you seem to have developed an ever stronger anti EU agenda of your own. In my opinion Swale’s interpretation of the EU is entirely right. You of course have every right to differ, but please don’t go down the Farage route of selectivity and massive exaggeration...you’re better than that.

[MadAmster]

Thanks rA.

Try this. Since adopting this idea myself, I found out that David Icke has actually given it a name. The Totalitarian Tip Toe. I realise that some will now switch off at the mention of his name but bear with me. I agree that some of his claims may be "out there" enough for people to question his sanity (Son of the Godhead, shape changing lizards to name but 2) but, on the other hand, quite a lot of the things he has said have come about. His list of countries that would get invaded over the next 20 odd years. They included Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan and a couple of others that have been invaded. It also included Venezuela and Iran, both of which appear to be being put on Trump's list of who's next. Another was North Korea. There are other things he has said which have also come true.

His Totalitarian Tip Toe is, he says, knowing the end game, Totalitarianism, but doing it slowly in steps. Gently edging there in small steps that don't give away the goal. He says, and he may be right on this too, it started with the EEC, a free trade area that would be good for jobs. People agreed. Maastricht was the next step. Lisbon the following step. People could be forgiven for looking at this political centralistaion in the same way financial/business globalisation has led to huge multinationals controlled by the same mega rich shareholders. Each new merger or takeover means higher shareholder dividends but fewer jobs. I would dearly love to see globalisation halted, at worst and, at best, somewhat reversed to benefit "the working class". The way technology is advancing, jobs currently done by people will be done away with. It is the menial job that is disappearing. It is jobs requiring communications skills, technological skills and other skills requiring a high (ish) IQ that are being developed. Those less blessed in the IQ department will, in the not too distant future, be incapable of carrying out the jobs that exist. What will happen to them?

How long before cashiers are no longer required in Supermarkets? What with tuition fees and the replacement of grants by student loans, the majority of supermarket cashiers in NL are students who need the money the job provides to get by. Replace those jobs with the new self service tills and what can the students do that will fit their Uni timetable?

I could go on but you get my drift. There is a lot wrong on this planet. All of the recent "invasions" have been about the control of God. Gold, Oil and Diamonds and the wealth they create for a very small minority of people.

A country dumps the Petrodollar for the Euro. It gets invaded. Another develops its own Gold Standard currency and looks to roll that out over all of Africa. It gets invaded. Iraq had no WMD. The reason behind all fo the recent invasions is to keep the USA at #1 in world power.

The Taliban all but wiped out herion supply.............. They aren't very nice people but....... those nice Americans decided to invade. herion production is back where it was pre Taliban.

So much wrong with the world and little or no chance for the man in the street to change it.

It frustrates the hell out of me.