Brexit View

[teddyboy23]

Rh you know you can't trust the polls

[titch juicy]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> The point was people voted for change. The roots

> of this may go back before the Thatcher years but

> in areas where the coal pits and factories closed,

> for example, nothing replaced them. The

> Blair/Brown years and Cameron/Osborne regime

> changed nothing.

>

> Remaining in the EU, as it is currently configured

> will change nothing. Germany is booming but nearly

> everyone else is chugging along. Spain, Italy,

> Portugal Greece and Cyprus are in intensive care.

> Migration from Africa will get worse. The EU needs

> to integrate more to survive, co-ordinate taxes,

> create an army.

>

> Brexit is the only rational course

No, the people voted for an imagined outcome that meant change for the better. The imagined outcome was based on lies and dirty money.

The actual outcome will be change for the worse.

Not what the people voted for at all.

Unlike Joeleg, I believe that brexit could unravel and possibly will not go ahead at all.

[titch juicy]

It's beyond hilarious that people still on the leave side are trying to blame remainers for trying to subvert the process.

When you have May, Johnson, Davis and Hammond all saying different things. Liam Fox sounds like he sensibly staying out of the way.

Omnishambles.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40571123

[JohnL]

Johnson isn't keeping quiet. He's told the EU they can "Go Whistle" for their divorce settlement

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/boris-johnson-tells-the-eu-to-go-whistle-on-brexit-divorce-bill/#

[titch juicy]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Johnson isn't keeping quiet. He's told the EU

> they can "Go Whistle" for their divorce

> settlement

>

> https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/boris-johnso

> n-tells-the-eu-to-go-whistle-on-brexit-divorce-bil

> l/#

Yes, I posted the same.

Also;

"We have worked up a 'no deal' alternative in some detail" David Davis 12/06/2017

"There is no plan for 'no deal'" Boris Johnson 11/07/2017

[red devil]

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Liam Fox sounds like he sensibly staying out of the way.

Isn't he 'International Trade' Minister, yet can't do anything until Brexit actually happens? So in the meantime he just sorts of flits about a lot, like an annoying mossie you want to swat. Come to think of it, he does have a bit of a hum when he speaks...

[JohnL]

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Johnson isn't keeping quiet. He's told the EU

> > they can "Go Whistle" for their divorce

> > settlement

> >

> >

> https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/boris-johnso

>

> >

> n-tells-the-eu-to-go-whistle-on-brexit-divorce-bil

>

> > l/#

>

>

> Yes, I posted the same.

>

>

> Also;

>

> "We have worked up a 'no deal' alternative in some

> detail" David Davis 12/06/2017

>

> "There is no plan for 'no deal'" Boris Johnson

> 11/07/2017

Corbyn is still playing it smart but polite

Ukip spokesman Gerard Batten: 'The UK does not owe the EU ?a penny?'.

Corbyn: ?pay what we are legally required to pay, but nothing beyond that".

[titch juicy]

Corbyn's view of Brexit is just as unpalatable to me as the one being touted by the other side.

[Loz]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Corbyn is still playing it smart but polite

>

> Ukip spokesman Gerard Batten: 'The UK does not owe the EU ?a penny?'.

> Corbyn: ?pay what we are legally required to pay, but nothing beyond that".

I actually have no idea what Labour's policy on Brexit is, apart from the completely meaningless mantra of "A Jobs First Brexit" (which was coined in response to May's equally meaningless 'Brexit Means Brexit').

You really do start to suspect none of them has a scooby of what they actually want to do and are too scared of the utterly split electorate to actually outline a solid position. Looks like we have two years (well, 20 months) of blathering and dithering before they push us off the cliff and into the abyss.

Project Economic Suicide, indeed.

[uncleglen]

A bit more realistic

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/11/boris-johnson-accuses-eu-extortion-brexit-divorce-bill-says/

since the EU haven't had a budget ratified I imagine they are conjuring up figures based on the extra that Germany and France will have to pay after we are gone

[JohnL]

We all guess Corbyn couldn't do much better in relation to Brexit - and a lot of people now seem to want to remain, but at least he's not saying too much about it, just letting May deal with it as the economy gets worse.

I suspect Corbyn supports Brexit in order to set up his ideals without outside interference, it seems however that Socialism to some extent is making a come back.

[JoeLeg]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> On the whole JoeLeg I agree with most of that.

>

Lord a' mercy, a Remainer and a Brexiter finding common ground. There's hope yet!

> 1. Yes many menial low paid jobs are done by

> non-British people. There should be an open debate

> on this, people and politicians are too frightened

> to address it. Dole and housing benefit play a big

> part for Brits. I'm unemployed with rent paid etc.

> If I work in an old people's home, pick peas in

> Lincolnshire, fruit in Kent I lose some benefits,

> not worth my time. You don't hear the tories,

> Labour or other parties talking about this, too

> scared, no votes in it. It's not the EU's fault we

> have this situation and that many EU migrants fill

> these positions.

Agree entirely.

>

> 2. Your second point. Similar to above. However,

> foreigners will work for less pay and employers

> certainly will pay the minimum they can get away

> with and to hell with tax payers who pay for tax

> credits. Tax payers should not be required to

> subsidise companies paying low pay (see scandalous

> gig economy scams here). None of this is he EU's

> fault with the exception that the southern

> countries of the EU cannot provide jobs for their

> own people because Germany has them over a barrel

> repaying debts to German banks. People from poorer

> EU countries will migrate here for low wages which

> are actually higher than they can earn in their

> own countries.

Yes, the wages are higher than where they come from, but the UK is not alone in that by a long chalk. They come here because they can get the jobs, and those employers will take the workers who actually DO the job properly, which, yes, goes back to my first point and I accept I'm largely repeating myself.

>

> 3. Your third point wanders about a bit.

Yes, I know...Mea culpa.

However,

> I agree that a good number of Brexiteers see

> immigration as a very serious problem which I

> think is unfair. What must not be forgotten though

> is many parts of Britain are suffering. No jobs.

> High streets with shops closing being filled with

> charity shops. Libraries closing and so on. The EU

> got the blame for much of this in the Referendum

> quite unfairly.

I actually thin immigration IS a problem in many parts of the UK, but I don't think throwing the baby out with the bathwater was the solution. I would've preferred successive govts to recognise that they are running the whole country, not just the big cities, but they've done what they've done and here we are.

>

> The point was people voted for change. The roots

> of this may go back before the Thatcher years but

> in areas where the coal pits and factories closed,

> for example, nothing replaced them. The

> Blair/Brown years and Cameron/Osborne regime

> changed nothing.

>

> Remaining in the EU, as it is currently configured

> will change nothing. Germany is booming but nearly

> everyone else is chugging along. Spain, Italy,

> Portugal Greece and Cyprus are in intensive care.

> Migration from Africa will get worse. The EU needs

> to integrate more to survive, co-ordinate taxes,

> create an army.

>

> Brexit is the only rational course

I think it would've been better to stay in and force change from inside, because I agree change is needed. However, here we are. Brave new world indeed. My fear is that the 52% will have a disparity of ideas over "which Brexit" they voted for, and there will be continued anger from those who don't like what comes out in the wash. I'm far from convinced that this will solve anything, though if in ten years time we have near-full employment, a thriving (proper) apprenticeship scheme, solid British manufacturing and services being sold across the world and still manage to be outward-looking and inclusive in our nature, then I'll happily eat my words.

[keano77]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Johnson isn't keeping quiet. He's told the EU

> they can "Go Whistle" for their divorce

> settlement

>

> https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/boris-johnso

> n-tells-the-eu-to-go-whistle-on-brexit-divorce-bil

> l/#

EU officials plan ?50,000 staff party with 700 bottles of wine

"European Union officials are looking forward to a massive eight-hour end of year party, which will boast 700 bottles of wine and a dinner with 26 different dishes at a cost of up to ?48,600.

... The bill will be paid from the council budget, which is money from EU member states including Britain..."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/11/eu-officials-plan-50000-staff-party-700-bottles-wine/

Quite right Boris

[keano77]

JoeLeg, it's a pleasure to sword fence with a rational remainer.

I'm more used to the wailing and gnashing of teeth of remainers shrieking 'Project Economic Suicide'

No one said freedom is an easy path to follow and we might be in for a rough ride for a while. It's quite possible many EU countries will thank Britain for helping to liberate them in years to come.

[red devil]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 4th Viscount St Davids no longer if he's not

> careful and that's a hereditary peerage he's

> playing fast and loose with (assuming the Queen

> can remove it ) She wore an EU hat remember -

> Viscount St Davids could end up in the Tower :)

Guilty...http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40574754

[rendelharris]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> No one said freedom is an easy path to follow and

> we might be in for a rough ride for a while. It's

> quite possible many EU countries will thank

> Britain for helping to liberate them in years to

> come.

Calm down Churchill, this isn't 1940, however much some of the rhetoric would have us believe it is.

[JohnL]

Theresa Mays official majority is down by one now

Anne Marie Morris has had the whip withdrawn for using the N word.

[keano77]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> keano77 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > No one said freedom is an easy path to follow

> and

> > we might be in for a rough ride for a while.

> It's

> > quite possible many EU countries will thank

> > Britain for helping to liberate them in years

> to

> > come.

>

> Calm down Churchill, this isn't 1940, however much

> some of the rhetoric would have us believe it is.

✌️

[DulwichLondoner]

keano77 Wrote:

> You're rightly concerned about shortages in your

> area. No problem, under selective immigration let

> more people you need in but say no to hundreds of

> thousands of others with no beneficial skills that

> the EU insists we must let in.

You are assuming that the process to do this will be fair, efficient, and not too costly.

That's a BIG assumption to make. May I ask WHY you are making this assumption, and based on what exactly?

This country loves to make fun of EU bureaucracy (the fake news of straight bananas is a favourite, thank you Boris) but our own bureaucracy is no better.

How much do you know about the current immigration system? Have you read in the press those stories about, say, the EU couple who naturalised, but their children didn't, because they failed to provide proof that their children live with them? What evidence were they supposed to provide? Banking statements and driving licence for minors? After all the publicity, the Home Office backtracked, but, still...

Have you ever spoken to non-EU migrants about the UK visa process? I have. I'm talking about highly qualified PhD students or PhD graduates, i.e. people for whom neither the skills nor their shortage is in question. They all talk about the nightmare that the immigration system is. If you are, say, Chinese, and would need to go through a somewhat similar process in pretty much the rest of the world, fine, but if you are European and can have very good opportunities in the rest of the continent, then you will need a pretty strong incentive to come here.

Also, even if the system will be fair, efficient, etc., right now there is no certainty whatsoever, so who can blame Europeans who are less inclined to come here now?

>

> Some of the scum of Europe has been allowed onto

> to our shores, gangsters, drug dealers, people

> traffickers and so on. We don't need people like

> that.

Could you be so kind as to elaborate on that? The fact that Great Britain is an island, and that neither the UK nor Ireland are in Schengen, helps massively in controlling immigration. It is perfectly within a member state's right to forbid entry to convicted rapists and other criminals, or to expel Europeans who cannot support themselves and/or have committed serious crimes. Geography makes border checks much easier here than in the rest of the continent. A convicted, say, German rapist has many, many ways to travel to France Austria Italy etc without his documents being checked and without his identity being verified. He'd have no way, AFAIK, of travelling to the UK without his identity being verified at the border, other than possibly hiding in a van at Calais or travelling by dinghy from France. As the Financial Times pointed out recently, Belgium is one of the most aggressive EU countries in expelling European citizens who cannot support themselves - and it does so in perfect compliance with EU laws and rules.

So, let me ask you again: would you be so kind as to elaborate?

It doesn't help that the UK doesn't have a population register, like most (if not all) of continental Europe. And please refrain from the usual song and dance about privacy: GCHQ's spying activity are way more pervasive than those of other intelligence agencies in countries which do have a population register!

Finally, am I the only one who thinks it's crazy that early elections require a majority of > 60% (66% maybe? Don't remember exactly) whereas something as fundamentally important, life-changing and irreversible like Brexit can be decided on a simple 52% majority???

[DulwichLondoner]

keano77 Wrote:

> EU officials plan ?50,000 staff party with 700

> bottles of wine

>

> "European Union officials are looking forward to a

> massive eight-hour end of year party, which will

> boast 700 bottles of wine and a dinner with 26

> different dishes at a cost of up to ?48,600.

>

> ... The bill will be paid from the council budget,

> which is money from EU member states including

> Britain..."

>

> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/11/eu-offi

> cials-plan-50000-staff-party-700-bottles-wine/

If you want to talk about EU's illogical expenses, the folly of the travelling circus between Brussels and Strasbourg would be a much better example: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/10565686/The-farce-of-the-EU-travelling-circus.html

However, these examples miss the point entirely.

The real question shouldn't be: are these expenses justified?

The real question should be: OK, the EU isn't perfect, and these examples prove it. However, what will change by leaving? Will we really be better off?

The folly is that the leave campaign was based on a number of lies (NHS bus, anyone?) but, most importantly, didn't present any kind of clear explanation on what Brexit would mean. Tautologies don't help, Theresa. The vote was effectively on the status quo vs total uncertainty. I have met people who despise the EU deeply, but voted remain because they didn't want to provide an unknown government with a blank cheque on Brexit.

[keano77]

You raise a number of points there DulwichLondoner

I'm not an expert in immigration matters and no doubt there will always be (unjust) anomalies. However, it can't be too difficult to decide what our immigration needs are (see JoeLegs' post above of the problems in the hospitality industry).

Loz will be able to speak with more authority on this, but Australia has operated a strict immigration policy for a good many years. When I lived there (admittedly a good few years ago now) pastry chefs were in great demand for example, yet if you were a nurse or worked in the financial industry you weren't required thank you very much as Australia had plenty of qualified people of their own. (FYI, Jackeroos and Jilleroos were also quite sought after).

I really don't need to elaborate on my scum of Europe point. Read the papers and heed police warnings. Don't forget, a good number of EU countries had compulsory national service until recently, if not now. Conscripts were trained in using firearms. The bad hombres as my mate Trump puts it are mean dudes.

Sorry, edited to add I don't understand your last point about the 60% requirement in elections. What elections?

[DulwichLondoner]

No, you do need to elaborate on your point about Europe scams, because you cannot just throw such accusations without substantiating them. I mean, you can, but then people will realise it's a waste of time to debate with you...

Do you have any proof that:

there has been any kind of crime epidemic due to EU citizens?

that we cannot expel EU criminals, or block them at the border?

there is a wave of EU criminals all arriving in this country illegally, e.g. hiding in trucks at Calais or travelling by dinghy from France?

Do you yes or not? If you do, please share them.If you don't, what were you basing those accusations on?

[keano77]

DulwichLondoner said:

"... The vote was effectively on the status quo vs total uncertainty... "

I think you're right. It certainly applies to me. As I've stated before I voted leave on the principle of sovereignty. A country that can't make its own laws and can be told what to do by another body isn't a sovereign state. Simple.

Am I worried about Brexit? Yes. I'm not sure we have the people in place to stand up to Europe and to set conditions in place to unleash the entrepreneurial potential of the British people.

My faith in democracy has also been shaken to the core by the bitter backlash of some remainers who don't seem able to accept the result of a referendum they participated in.

[JoeLeg]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> My faith in democracy has also been shaken to the

> core by the bitter backlash of some remainers who

> don't seem able to accept the result of a

> referendum they participated in.

No. No, no, no, no, no....

Just hang on a moment. At the risk of engaging in my favourite hobby and repeating myself, we live in a democracy. Every time there is a vote, an election, a choice in something, someone is going to win and someone is going to lose.

People who lose, in a democracy, have to accept that. It's part of living in a society that doesn't involve 5am alarm calls from the secret police and having a press that is allowed to print things others don't like. It's one of the main reasons that I, as a Remain voter, woke up that morning, saw the result, complained loudly for several days (alright, weeks if not months) then took a deep breath and remembered that this is part and parcel of not living in an unpleasant part of the world. I don't get everything I want and I share this land with others who sometimes win when I lose.

However, people who lose are allowed to complain about the outcome. And they're allowed to try and change it, provided that work within the established legal framework. That, too, is part of living in a democracy. And I would note that on this issue there is no serious (or even semi-serious) belief that Brexit can actually be derailed; that's tinfoil hat territory.

It's why I have no truck with this whole "defying the will of the people" rubbish. We're still the people, and now we're all in it together, and while I'll probably never stop believing that this was a mistake, I'm not about to turn my back on this country. I don't think all Leave voters are racists, I don't think they are all idiots. I'm an adult and I work with people on things that we can find common ground on and try to compromise on the rest. Anything else is anarchy.

Doesn't mean there won't be a lot of arguments on the way though...

[DulwichLondoner]

@keano77:

On immigration: you basically don?t know much about the current system, don?t know much about how it will develop for EU citizens, yet you are confident it will be fair and in the UK?s best interest. Sounds like an opinion based on not much hard evidence?

On majorities: calling a snap election requires a 2/3 majority in the Commons. The Brexit referendum required a 50% + 1 majority. This difference is crazy, because Brexit produces more profound and irreversible changes than a new government (most laws can, after all be reversed, but we cannot realistically join the EU after leaving). This is the reason why, for example, most countries with written constitutions tend to require a majority greater than 50% for fundamental changes to the constitution itself or to certain laws.

On the lies of the leave campaign: your silence is deafening. Are you OK with the lies on the NHS buses? Farage admitted they were lies. Or do you think those promises are true?

On sovereignty: can you please explain what was so unacceptable that the EU has been imposing on the poor British people? If you are so keen on this point, you will no doubt be able to quickly elaborate on the unacceptable EU impositions which you will be glad to get rid of, and why. No nation is ever entirely sovereign in the sense of being able to do whatever it feels like, not even insular North Korea. Were the French forcing you to carry baguettes under your elbows? Did the Italians make it illegal to put cheese on spaghetti with clams? Were the Germans and Czechs prohibiting warm British ale in favour of cold lager?

On democracy: I echo what JoeLeg said. If anything, the behaviour of certain right-wing pro-Brexit press has been disgusting. The Daily Express came out with a title asking if EU regulations had contributed to the Grenfell fire. Do these people have no decency? Most pro-Brexit press depicted Gina Miller as a tyrant who tried to subvert the will of the people. Excuse me? Wasn?t this about taking back sovereignty? Aren?t we a parliamentary democracy? Shouldn?t parliament then have the final say? What?s so undemocratic about that? Especially because the people voted to leave the EU, but didn?t vote on the hows ? all the more reason to involve parliament.