anon676545345

24 minutes ago, keemapoot said:

I don't think so. I think it rather shows that referendum results which cannot reasonably be expected to be enacted within a reasonable period of time may be subject to revisiting. 

 

So, in future, let's intelligently find another way to effect massive changes that take many years, and fully expect that knowledge, attitudes and circumstances may change the perspective if referendum items are too long to implement.

Ah yes the people are to stupid to be allowed a say in the future, so when the next version of TTIP come in making government monopolies on health care illegal we can wave bye bye to the NHS, doesn't matter people are to stupid for free health care our neoliberal overlords know best.

27 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Currently we leave at end of March; that's law. However law may be changed by replacement with new law.

 

CONs will win the confidence vote which causes a problem for Corbyn. Good 

 

May should link with Labour moderates, Lib Dems and SNP to deliver my plan discussed above which is similar to N+

 

This could work and would split the CONs. Good. I hope LAB also splits.

 

Time for center to take the lead

 

Ill take abet on that!

 

Now let's see the leavers complain?

Wouldn't be so sure about Corbyn losing if it comes to a general election, especially not if May is still leading the Cons she's done an absolutely terrible job the only positive thing to say about her is she's persistently refused to resign, which is a strange compliment but when you consider that's what every other Tory has done  it makes you realise there isn't even a party to vote for. That aside the main reason I want to leave the EU is because the Tory's and New Labour helped turn it into a Neoliberal train wreck, so there's no way in hell I'd ever vote Tory.

2 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Might not have said it, but it certainly implied that the money would go to the NHS!

 

Plus, of course, the £350 itself was a lie.

 

Not forgetting the Leave campaign's lie about 70 million Turks heading our way if we didn't leave!

 

Cameron had no constitutional right to make such a promise; only Parliament can do so because Parliament is sovereign.

 

Whatever terms we leave the EU on, May's deal, another deal, no deal; or even if Article 50 is withdrawn, whether after another referendum or not, is a matter for Parliament to decide.

Do you not see the hypocrisy in your post? You state that Cameron the then Prime Minister didn't have the authority to say there will be no second vote and the will of the people will be actioned. Yet you seem to think that a suggestion on a bus by bojo was a stead fast promise.

46 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

I posted the MSCI World. And it amazes me how someone who doesn’t know that the MSCI World isn’t the MSCI ACWI keeps telling others they lack “sound economic knowledge” and “don't understand what they're talking about”. Are you really surprised why Brexiteers are called uneducated or uninformed? You’re the best example. 

 

 

(For clarification, I was posting the chart of an iShares ETF tracking the MSCI World.)

 

 

 

Typical remainer straw man tactics my points were on the trade deficit, inflation and the devaluation of the £ having positive effects on the UK's manufacturing PMI. You're not addressing my points, just focusing on the irrelevant MSCI Index.

15 minutes ago, sandyf said:

What constitutes overcrowding?

It is not long since we saw the FS praising Singapore and even the most densely populated areas of the UK are nowhere near Singapore levels.

Overcrowding is more of a perception generated by various factors,

lack of accommodation,overrun GP's, hospitals, NHS in general,inefficient public services, schools, etc etc.

All of this is under government control, I was recently told the waiting time for a response to an enquiry from the DWP was around 12 weeks, would that be too many enquiries or not enough staff.

The government knows how many people live in the UK but resources provided during the austerity regime fell well short of what was required and there is very little indication of things getting any better. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not going to resolve very much.

If the underlying problems hadn't been allowed to get out of hand in the first place we wouldn't be in this mess.

The EU's Maastricht criteria have ensured continent wide austerity 

https://www.europeaninstitute.org/index.php/112-european-affairs/special-g-20-issue-on-financial-reform/1180-austerity-measures-in-the-eu

Always cracks me up when someone claims to be anti-austerity but is pro-EU the 2 just don't mix the EU is pro-austerity and has forced austerity measures on Greece, Portugal, Ireland and Italy. The EU is deeply Neo-liberal which essentially is a political and economical ideology advocating a globalised economy under the control of a financial elite, outside the regulative control of any state jurisdiction.

1 hour ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

...says the one who’s making a fool out of himself while trying to mock others. 

Emerging markets represent 11.60% of the MSCI ACWI Index

14 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

We have no idea as to whether it is truthful or biased, until the full movie is released.

It's obviously biased it's no doubt designed to get remain scums narrative across without having to go to the trouble of actually proving it.

On 1/14/2019 at 7:58 AM, rixalex said:

No. This isn't about pettiness. This is about civility and courtesy, and why for some reason you lack it and chose to attack me as being stupid for reading your sentence as being a statement, when there was a question mark at the end. However, as can be clearly seen by the quoted sentence below:

 

 

...your sentence is indeed a question, but one that contains within it, a statement about "many Brexiteers".

 

When i replied to you on that statement, contained within your question, disagreeing with you that many Brexiteers do take that view, it would have been one thing to disagree with me and argue that in your opinion many Brexiteers do hold that view, but you didn't. Instead you accused me of being stupid for not being able to understand question marks.

 

As i say, i am genuinely baffled as to what this aggressive and confrontational approach is all about.

This is why I refer to remain supporters as scum, every post they make is insulting and condescending, they post links to articles that contradict their position simply because they don't understand what they're talking about. But because the BBC tells them that remainers are 'educated' and leavers are not they assume the mantle of intellectual superiority, then when faced with a reasoned argument they intentionally misrepresent your position to create a straw man, it's like the old adage "never argue with an idiot, they'll drag you down to their level then beat you with experience".

9 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

You are wrong.
"The EU has tariffs on goods but not on services, so these companies won't be affected by tariffs."
Post a source here that proves that.

"Looking at service industries, all barriers to trade are NTBs. There are no tariffs on services". 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44291103

18 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

I can agree.
But the UK Exports will not overgrow the Imports with additional trade barriers after Brexit 
in a 10- 15  year time window frame.
If you just look at the financial services, that's the golden egg the UK is sitting on.
With Brexit, the UK will lose this passport rights. Why should the EU allow a third country to tap off the cream here? Then take a look at how long it will take for the UK to produce products that will become more competitive in international competition. With the outflow of research and development and without the most unbureaucratic access to the biggest, at present, market of the world aka your neighbors. The economic dream that you describe will certainly not arrive in the next 15 years. There are completely different, much more economically powerful countries (USA, China and the resource-rich country Russia) which will spit into your Brexit soup.


Financial services though they represent a large portion of UK exports 80% don't provide many jobs outside of London. That aside if we lose our pass porting rites companies will move offices to Europe not their entire business as they benefit from UK regulations and tax havens which aren't easily replaced. As an example EU countries account for 11% of Lloyds business they've relocated some staff to Brussels to enable them to continue operating in the EU, however they're still a UK company. The EU has tariffs on goods but not on services, so these companies won't be affected by tariffs.

The EU does have tariffs on goods but you've already answered this question yourself there's a trade deficit they export more goods to us than we do to them. This combined with the fact that services are unaffected by the single market gives the UK a serious negotiating advantage, we will continue to trade with them and they with us. 

The EU is protectionist and places high tariffs to protect manufacturing and agriculture, these tariffs mean we're paying 20% over world prices. Without these barriers the UK can source materials cheaper from outside the EU reducing costs for manufacturers and allowing us to increase exports to nations outside the EU which already account for 56% of our exports. 

8 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Okay, last good-natured try.
The UK has a trade deficit. It imports more than it exports.
Even if you include the financial services.
Now explain how a loss of purchasing power of the British pound of about 20% should be positive here?
In addition to the fact that all UK land, houses, stocks are worth less in international currency comparison.
Or do you really mean that Brexit will encourage UK exports overgrows the Import with additional trade barriers after Brexit?
Rather, I see that pigs learn to fly.

Again you're showing a lack of understanding you're describing a trade deficit which in the long run is bad for the economy, particularly the manufacturing sector. When a country is importing more goods from foreign companies it drives down prices and domestic companies can't compete which causes job losses, fewer goods are produced and the trade deficit grows. 

The decrease in the value of the £ is allowing UK companies to compete again, this increases the number of jobs as shown by the rise in employment since the referendum. 

14 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Unfortunately I have to tell you, and it does not need any idiotic Insults, that you have no idea about economics.
That the Uk is an energy self-sufficient country, is currently nonsense.
Since 2004, the UK has been a net importer of Energy.
And sorry, that pineapple example was for 4 graders.
And I'm not sure if you understand that, because you're right on the export side,
but the UK imports more than it exports!
Are you aware of that?

Can you not read? I didn't say the UK was energy self sufficient, I said the UK is not resource poor and that we produce most our oil from our North Sea fields which we do 72% of our oil comes from those reserves. We're actually forecast to become an oil exporter. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-26/make-room-opec-the-u-k-is-set-to-become-net-crude-oil-exporter

We've also got huge untapped reserves of the coast of the Falkland Islands, so your claim that we're resource poor is as ludicrous as you waffle about interest rates. Have you noticed the trend, your wrong all the time, every time, so do you not think you could be wrong about Brexit?

1 hour ago, tomacht8 said:

Voodoo economics.
Over the past two years, the pound has lost about 20% in international purchasing power.
For some currency pairings more, for others less.
You do not seem to dispute that either.
Otherwise, ask all the British who live longer in Thailand.
An simple example:
Two years ago, you still got 50 baht for 1 pound.
So you could buy 5 pineapples (unit price 10 baht).
Now you only get 40 Baht for 1 pound and can only buy 4 pieces of pineapple.

What does that mean for a resource-poor country like the UK, which has to buy (import) its energy (oil, gas, electricity), its raw materials for production and many foods internationally?

Look at the inflation rate. From 0% to 3% since 2016, with a slight downtrend at the end.
Then compare that to GDP growth. Depending on the institute, between 1.5% - 1.9%.
The net balance is negative.
There is/was no net growth of the UK economy since 2016.

Man this is why I hate you idiots so much, you obviously know absolutely nothing but you've gone on google come up with a couple of charts that you think support your point. Not knowing that a steady rate of inflation is good for the economy and mislabeling it as 3% even though the chart YOU posted shows it's lower.

The UK is not a resource poor country we get most of our oil from our North Sea fields.

No one cares how many pineapples you can buy in Thailand your analogy is childish, patronising and well just plain wrong. UK manufacturers may have to pay more for materials they import but the 20% reduction in the exchange rate makes their products more attractively priced for the export market, this is supported by the UK's increased manufacturing PMI i.e actual data.

56 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Voodoo economics.
Over the past two years, the pound has lost about 20% in international purchasing power.
For some currency pairings more, for others less.
You do not seem to dispute that either.
Otherwise, ask all the British who live longer in Thailand.
An simple example:
Two years ago, you still got 50 baht for 1 pound.
So you could buy 5 pineapples (unit price 10 baht).
Now you only get 40 Baht for 1 pound and can only buy 4 pieces of pineapple.

What does that mean for a resource-poor country like the UK, which has to buy (import) its energy (oil, gas, electricity), its raw materials for production and many foods internationally?

Look at the inflation rate. From 0% to 3% since 2016, with a slight downtrend at the end.
Then compare that to GDP growth. Depending on the institute, between 1.5% - 1.9%.
The net balance is negative.
There is/was no net growth of the UK economy since 2016.

You do realise that 0% inflation is bad don't you? Also inflation is now at 2.2% pretty much inline with the BOE's target rate of 2%

9 minutes ago, nauseus said:

So what? Where's the EU bit?

Exactly he's comparing UK growth to world growth, the UK is a developed economy of course it's growing slower than the rest of the world which encompasses the likes of India and China. It's just another example of a remainer without sound economic knowledge trying to trash the UK.

20 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

1. Why insult others who have a different opinion?
2. BTW the UK is still in the EU!
3. How good is a British pound Investment, when the currency has lost around 20% of his
purchasing power internationally since Brexit?
4. Unsteady insults without sound economic knowledge pull the quality of a forum down unfortunately.

1) Because remainers have been using insults and condescension for the last two years I've tried having reasonable debates but they always follow the same tactics. To me now it's far more than a difference of opinion I dislike them on a fundamental level.

2) I know the UK is still in the EU, remainers said we'd be in a recession should we vote leave and foreign investment would dry up, we're not and it hasn't. 

3) A lower currency is a double edged sword at best, it's good for the manufacturing sector, the 20% decrease in the £ would more than offset the 3% tariff should we go to WTO rules. Inflation is inline with the BOE's target and no ones worried about the £ other than hysterical remainers because it's the only thing they can point to that Brexit has had an effect on. 

4) The unsteady insults without sound economic knowledge come almost entirely from the remain side, seriously just look at this thread. Just yesterday one guy was saying the FTSE had crashed since the referendum, it's actually higher. Another idiot pointed out the FTSE was lower than it was in 1999, may be so but what's that got to do with Brexit. 

6 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

I’m sure Brexiteers would love it there; manipulated votes and large scale misinformation all the time and people are made to believe that’s democracy. Plus, in Venezuela you also get the wrecked economy you’re working so hard to achieve. 

The UK economy is booming since we voted to leave, the increase in the FTSE shows companies are investing in the UK in anticipation of us opening g up our economy to trade with the rest of the world, not shackled to the decaying, bureaucratic EU. The future is bright one day you'll thank us for our foresight, and hey we've preserved your right to vote and have a say in your future, we've basically saved democracy, despite the best efforts of idiots like you, I'm so proud to call myself a Brexiteer!