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

[Trickytreesreds]

Tricky, your post is so typical of the newfound 'Brexiteer' aggressive bully boy attitude. As someone who obviously believes in Brexit, southern raised a reasonable point which I think I answered in a reasonable way. Swale added his take on the situation in a perfectly measured manner. Then you come marching in with you 'storm trooper' style of capitals - they really don't make the point any better - telling people they're 'idiots', telling them to 'jog on' and 'shove it up their ass' and gleefully making suggestions that we'll be able to watch Europe 'burn', whatever that's meant to mean.
Fine line between your attitude and the type of extremist Brexiteer attitude which was responsible for Jo Cox's murder and the current threats to Gina Miller and Anna Soubry. Personally I accept that there are arguments on both sides, I obviously favour the Remain side but the attitude of hard core Brexiteers such as yourself is becoming both increasingly disturbed and disturbing.

Ramanag, you have a sensitive style of argument, rather than Junkers love child swale.
I don't get this all Brexiters threaten stance.
Doesn't Farage receive death threats all the time? Doesn't Corbyns army, use intimidation as a weapon?
Jo Cox was murdered by a psychotic extremist, who favoured Nazi ideology and penned letters to South Africa and adored the kkk.
In what ****ing way was that a Brexit support?

Soubary, for instance. Makes a mockery of her constituents and follows her own agenda, when her voting area quite openly said leave. She is a classic example of politician who believes her "sheep" (no pun intended) should do as they are told. I've met the woman. She's arrogant, obnoxious and a narcissist. (swale would love her)

Gina Miller is a multi millionaire, who knows jack **** about the downside of being an EU member. She purely wants to make more money at our expense. If You don't believe that, then I'm lost for words.

The point is, all the above had their own agenda for EU membership. It doesn't mean it is correct to the masses.
Don't try to pin threats and violence solely on Brexiters.
Your camp is just as bad.

http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/06/old-pe...rexit-5988781/

As I said though, mute point. The EU is doomed in it's current form. Italy/France/germany inside one year will change everything.

[swaledale]

TRicky does not have any reasoned argument, like a lot of Brexiteers his views are based on misinformation, stereotyping and extreme prejudice, fortunately most on here are able to provide a sensible argument for one view or another, Tricky long go lost all credibility his lack of knowledge demonstrated he hadn't a ****ing clue as to why NATO was formed.

As for the EU being doomed, really? All the indications are that the member states are prepared to suffer some economic loss to retain it.

[AdiSalisbury]

As for the EU being doomed, really? All the indications are that the member states are prepared to suffer some economic loss to retain it.

To take this on a slight tangent...

I'm not sure this is the case, it appears to me that certain (UK & EU) politicians as individual's are prepared for this, and are happy to cut one's nose off to spite one's face for their own personal gain. If I was a Spanish producer, already struggling to make ends meet, I'd not be too pleased with certain leading EU officials seemingly happy to put up extra barriers to trade, leaving me unable to sell to the UK and ultimately having to find a new job - who are they really punishing, and who do they really represent?

Equally, I voted out, but I can't abide Farage, and disagree with him on so many opinions. So when a remain voter attacks my vote by putting down Farage, it bypasses any meaningful debate, as I couldn't give a monkeys what Farage said / did / joked / threatened / promised ...etc.

So in other words, I don't think that what politicians say is a good indication of public (either side of argument, British and EU) feeling or how this will pan out in the long run, as they are of course going to put their personal agenda 1st. This thread is by far the most intelligent debate I've seen on the subject, but elsewhere all I see is people throwing political cliches / quotes around at each other, rather than considering the actual economic and cultural impact of the decision.

[roger_ramjet]

If the UK just walks away from the EU with no deal, then WTO trade rules apply, minimum 10% tariffs plus the pound would drop through the roof - mm I think your going to get a little shock in the next couple of years, but then you wont notice!

How exactly does the value of the pound drop through the roof? Where the hell was it before? Really really high because UK was leaving the EU perhaps?

[Ram59]

Anag, you and other remainers keep going on about the 350m as being the biggest thing in the brexit vote. Look at it with some common sense, how many brexiteers were persuaded by some meaningless figure that will help the NHS in some time in the future? How many people would know what 350m would mean to us individually?

Let's talk about a serious lie/threat, Osborne promised that if we dared to vote for brexit, then it would be immediately followed by an emergency budget full of cuts and tax increases which would take immediate effect, not years ahead. By now, we should be each hundreds of pounds worse off and have services even worse than they are now. We all know that didn't happen, not even after the regular autumn statement.

So stop keep on about the 350m, change the record.

[ramAnag]

Anag, you and other remainers keep going on about the 350m as being the biggest thing in the brexit vote. Look at it with some common sense, how many brexiteers were persuaded by some meaningless figure that will help the NHS in some time in the future? How many people would know what 350m would mean to us individually?

Let's talk about a serious lie/threat, Osborne promised that if we dared to vote for brexit, then it would be immediately followed by an emergency budget full of cuts and tax increases which would take immediate effect, not years ahead. By now, we should be each hundreds of pounds worse off and have services even worse than they are now. We all know that didn't happen, not even after the regular autumn statement.

So stop keep on about the 350m, change the record.

It's not a question of 'changing the record'. I quite agree with you that Cameron and Osborn lied and employed scare tactics...absolutely guilty as charged, but that doesn't in any way diminish the three facts that 1) the £350m promise was the biggest and most advertised lie of all. 2) only 37% of the electorate voted in favour of leaving 3) the result of the referendum has only ever been 'advisory'.

Given that situation why 'change the record'. Those three issues have never been seriously addressed and as long as that is the case is it so unreasonable to cite them as part of an argument against a course of action which I believe will be financially and politically damaging to the country I live in for the foreseeable future?

As for your question about 'how many Brexiteers were persuaded by some meaningless figure...'? Well quite a few I imagine, otherwise why were we all 'treated' to the sight of 'Boris' battle bus' with the figures emblazoned down each side - £350m per week on one side, £50m per day on the other - for weeks on end before the 23rd June? Don't know about you but I'd hazard a guess that someone within the Brexit campaign thought it might be almost as big a vote winner as it was a total fabrication.

[Andy_Faber]

It's not a question of 'changing the record'. I quite agree with you that Cameron and Osborn lied and employed scare tactics...absolutely guilty as charged, but that doesn't in any way diminish the three facts that 1) the £350m promise was the biggest and most advertised lie of all. 2) only 37% of the electorate voted in favour of leaving 3) the result of the referendum has only ever been 'advisory'. .

The £350m does come up rather too much. So, more politely than Ram59, I'd suggest that we accept that both sides used lies/untruths/exaggerations/scare tactics to win the day, but that the Leave side were more effective in peddling their lies than the Remain side. That would allow us to move on and continue this otherwise enlightening discussion.

Likewise the 37%. Yes we get that now. But the rules is the rules. I still hate Jack Taylor for disallowing David Nish's goal in '76 but I had to accept the decison no matter what my distaste for it.

And likewise the 'advisory' thing, although legally I believe it was non-binding rather than advisory. In fact even if the voting slip had said 'this is a binding decision' it wouldn't have been, as can see from subsequent events. So to me its another non-discussion.

[Andy_Faber]

As for the EU being doomed, really? All the indications are that the member states are prepared to suffer some economic loss to retain it.

I beg to differ, the politicians who run the member states are prepared for their subjects to suffer, and that's what hits the headlines. But dig beneath that and there's one heck of an undercurrent from real people that NO, we do NOT want to be collateral damage.

[swaledale]

I beg to differ, the politicians who run the member states are prepared for their subjects to suffer, and that's what hits the headlines. But dig beneath that and there's one heck of an undercurrent from real people that NO, we do NOT want to be collateral damage.

Well i guess it depends upon who one talks to! I listened to interview with people on the street from 6 different EU countries and virtually without exception, they expressed the view they did not see why if the UK left the EU it should continue to enjoy the benefits unless it complied with the rules and if that meant some economic loss the.

Unfortunately a mistake which Brits often make is that the Eu and its people think like we do or that we have the monopoly on whats right.

To say there is a heck of a groundswell is over hyping it, after all the Greeks elected a party on the premise of telling the Eu to get stuffed, I see no riots when they did a deal which was the opposite of what they were voted in for! The far right will always gain popularity in times of economic stress people like scapegoats and simple answers to complex questions, the problem is that those glib answers (not that the Leave people have got any plan or answers) are rather more difficult to put into pracrice.

The fact is that the vast majority of EU citizens want to stay in the Eu, they might like to see some changes, but then it will evolve as it has over the years and as it will continue to do so

[swaledale]

The £350m does come up rather too much. So, more politely than Ram59, I'd suggest that we accept that both sides used lies/untruths/exaggerations/scare tactics to win the day, but that the Leave side were more effective in peddling their lies than the Remain side. That would allow us to move on and continue this otherwise enlightening discussion.

Likewise the 37%. Yes we get that now. But the rules is the rules. I still hate Jack Taylor for disallowing David Nish's goal in '76 but I had to accept the decison no matter what my distaste for it.

And likewise the 'advisory' thing, although legally I believe it was non-binding rather than advisory. In fact even if the voting slip had said 'this is a binding decision' it wouldn't have been, as can see from subsequent events. So to me its another non-discussion.

The difference is that Leave actually peddled proven lies - the £350 million was plastered all over the cmpaign bus, its a bit convenient to say lets forget about that brazen lie (we don't even pay £350 million in the first place).

Yes remain predicted economic armageddon - overhyped but in reality as Brexit hasn't actually happened yet, the indications are showing that actually most of what they said economically is at the very least a distinct possibility, whereas none of leaves lies were even close to the truth.

The 37% is only relevant when Brexiteers say stuff like the "will of the people" and the legal status of the referendum is advisory if it had been a legally binding referendum then it could not have been overturned - if by recent events you mean the legal challenge to not letting parliament have a view on the terms of any deal, why would any leave campaigner have a problem with the UK sovereign parliament overseeing Brexit? After all that was one of the so called reasons for leaving the EU!