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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ram59

The freedom of movement also allows convicted British rapists, *****philes and other non desirables to freely integrate into unknowing eu communities. This is also wrong and a failure of the current systems.

At the moment there is some sort of system that lets the powers to be know about certain people amongst us. But does this extend to other countries when these people move around?

BTW anag, have I just suggested that all British people are associated with being rapists and such like?

---

You really are obtuse Ram59...not sure whether you miss the point through lack of understanding or if it's a deliberate strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngryRam

Now this is a good example of you not reading what is posted.
Post 934 - Your quote.
''people in their eighties and nineties are coonsidered to have a divine right to vote, even though some may not know what day it is let alone what they're voting for and yet seventeen year olds''

Now read my post 938 again.
Where did I accuse you of anything, in fact I agreed with you, to a degree, on the 17 year olds, I mearly pointed out that there had to be a starting point. Your comments on older people (above), where made I assume to provoke a discussion? Yes? So I entered into a conversation on the subject.. I mearly stated that they had earned the right to have a say and that to take away the right was dangerous ground. I stand by that comment..

This is my frustration with you guys... You simply are not reading what we reply.
:mad:

---

Actually it's a perfect example of you putting your own particular slant on what has been written to skew what has been said.

Your post implies that I've suggested 'the vote should be taken away from senior citizens just because they might die soon' and that this is 'dangerous ground'. I have said no such thing and you know it.

You also query my suggestion about seventeen year olds being allowed to vote by saying, 'Look hard enough and you might find a few ten year olds'...which is utter nonsense.

My point was...seventeen year olds have a bigger stake in and probably a greater awareness of a future which was last voted on over forty (not thirty as you also originally suggested) years ago than those people in their eighties or nineties who may be suffering from some sort of degenerative memory loss condition.

It's a fair point imo, up to you whether you agree or choose to answer it, but please don't try and distort the issue by deliberate misinterpretation and then accuse me of not reading the words I've quoted back to you.

Wibble

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Actually it's a perfect example of you putting your own particular slant on what has been written to skew what has been said.

Your post implies that I've suggested 'the vote should be taken away from senior citizens just because they might die soon' and that this is 'dangerous ground'. I have said no such thing and you know it.

You also query my suggestion about seventeen year olds being allowed to vote by saying, 'Look hard enough and you might find a few ten year olds'...which is utter nonsense.

My point was...seventeen year olds have a bigger stake in and probably a greater awareness of a future which was last voted on over forty (not thirty as you also originally suggested) years ago than those people in their eighties or nineties who may be suffering from some sort of degenerative memory loss condition.

It's a fair point imo, up to you whether you agree or choose to answer it, but please don't try and distort the issue by deliberate misinterpretation and then accuse me of not reading the words I've quoted back to you.

---

Oh for gods sake man.. Absolutely no point in this anymore, it laughable now.
I'm off.. Can't be arsed. :mad:

As I was saying...'you don't half get agitated and...well... angry when challenged. ;D
I rest my case...stick to football Angry...you make more sense. :heart:X

P.S. Except about Keogh.:P

1975 I voted out (for me) and was defeated; 2016 I voted in (for my kids) and was defeated. Can I have another chance to try and be on the winning side please - even if its a referendum on kicking the sweaties out of the Union.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngryRam

Firstly, this aint me being angry.. I'm nowhere near angry.

My frustration with you two is not your view on the EU, I respect your right to that and your pints of view. My frustration comes when you two don't read the replies properly an when someone answers one of your points you simply seem to ignore it.. Hence the debate is going nowhere.
:mad:

---

Well as we canter towards 1000 posts, i did try to bring the debate down to more simple points and post what in my opinion were positive points about EU membership and asked you to post what you thought were the benefits of leaving, which you didn't and still haven't. So you point about ignoring answers to posts cuts both ways!

I get frustrated having to cut down again and again the same old chestnuts which are many of the reasons given for leaving the Eu many of which have nothing to do with being in the EU, for example the issue with Syrian Refugees, this talk about Muslims etc etc.

I have repeatedly answered a number of points and in particular the debate about whether voting leave is a leap in the dark or voting remain is somehow a conservative decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by roger_ramjet

1975 I voted out (for me) and was defeated; 2016 I voted in (for my kids) and was defeated. Can I have another chance to try and be on the winning side please - even if its a referendum on kicking the sweaties out of the Union.

---

With that record please don't ever predict a Derby win. Interesting that you voted 'in' (for your kids)...ie for the longer term future.

'Wibble' and 'sweaties' ?

Sweaties = persons of a Scottish origin: sweaty socks - jocks (more rhyming slang for you)

Wibble - see Viz, quoth Roger Irrelevant

And yes my vote was in the balance until the night before - my son wanted to vote remain but was not in the country and hadnt sorted postal vote (bloody students) so that made my mind up. My objection is and always will be on grounds of the creation of a non transparent federal nightmare of Kafkaesque proportions, but this does not seem to concern that generation in the way it does mine.

Plus I accept I'm in the dead generation and the vote isnt about my future: a nursing home in the south of France has its appeals! 😁

but now it looks like Skegness