'Disaster looms,' says head of UK's anti-Brexit party

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, bert bloggs said:

maybe its them that are wrong

Nicely put ?

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

He built a faux-empirical argument around some opinion polls that pointed toward uni students and post-grads supporting remain. As an example for you, my daughter and the rest of her uni crowd voted remain on the single issue of wanting to keep visa-free travel around Europe (as if that would change under brexit! Maybe another remain lie circulated amongst students?) When I tried to raise all the other issues, both pro and con the EU, her face went blank. I asked her if she and any of her friends had discussed these other issues. Guess what the answer was? Further anecdotally, as a long-time business owner, I've had the opportunity to discuss brexit with many other business owners (some of them hugely successful). Only one, who runs a moderately successful industrial plumbing business, voted remain, because he is a staunch Labour supporter, and Labour recommended remain.

 

What's the point in trying to debate with someone who takes the immature view (and based on a false premise) that his opponents are stupid? Best just to ignore people like that.

Statistical not empirical or stoichiometric

[CG1 Blue]

25 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Nice try!

 

Trouble is I do read widely

 

AND, I do empathise with the disadvantaged and their desire to blame anything or anyone their chosen demagogue chooses. I get it.

 

BUT, the EU is the wrong target

 

Sure, the EU is very far from perfect, but it's not the root of the problems you face. For that, one should look closer to home.

 

We are a rich country and look at us. Embarrassing. 

 

Leaving the EU will not fix your problems. I promise.

 

As for my intelligence, who am I to comment? 

We're never going to agree on the EU, and I'm fine with that.

Your other comments above (e.g. "empathise with the disadvantaged") are again patronising and arrogant and indicate that you have a very blinkered view of the world.

If you are intelligent you hide it very well.

[puck2]

On 19.9.2017 at 3:18 PM, aright said:

It sometimes helps to remind ourselves why we voted out.

This from a letter in the DT

 

Why we should leave the EU (or what do we get in return for our EU membership fee?). In return for the £12,000 million here are a few of the things we could have done without the EU, and a few to look forward to if we don’t leave:

1. Would we have been able to destroy our UK fishing industry if we had not been in the EU? Answer - yes, but we wouldn't.
2. Would we have been able to forge free trade agreements with any country we liked on our terms, including the EU block, if we had not been in the EU - answer yes, of course.
3. Would we have massive immigration and have no legal ability to deny benefits to those immigrants, even though they have not contributed, if we had not been in the EU? Answer - no.
4. Would we have paid our farmers to leave fields fallow, give massive subsidies to large unproductive land owners such as the royal family, whilst importing massive amounts of food, if we had not been in the EU? Answer – of course not.
5. Would UK nationals have been able to settle in other EU countries if we were not in the EU? Answer - yes, but not if you came with nothing and expected to be provided with a living for nothing, which is the situation elsewhere in the world, not just in the EU.

6. Are we destroying our right of self-determination? Answer – yes we are. The Europarl contribution? The toothless body can't change a thing Brussels decides to do. "The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it". 

7. Laws: I want my laws made by the body I have a say in electing, not a group of unelected people in Brussels pandering to the requirements of Germany and France and voting down UK objections every time under the majority voting system. There are now more than 40,000 legal acts in the EU. There are also 15,000 Court verdicts and 62,000 international standards, all of which must be respected and obeyed by all citizens and companies in the EU.
8. Will we be able to set our own foreign policy in future? Answer - not if the EU gets its way. Military: if the EU has the army as it wants, and national armies cease to exist as the EU wants, and foreign policy is set by Brussels that may or may not reflect the needs and aspirations of UK as the EU wants, who would control this army? Who would it fight for? What happens if the UK disagrees but is voted down? What happens to the UK nuclear deterrent?

9. Is the EU an institution that treats all members fairly and equitably? Answer – no it isn’t. The Greeks remember when they couldn't access any of their money a few months ago, and this was entirely due to the ECB flexing its muscles to coerce the Greek government into doing as it was told!

10. Can we set our own financial policy in the future? Not within the EU. We will be required to join the Euro this decade by EU law. The EU wants a common financial policy and common tax rates, set by the ECB.

11. Do all MS obey the EU laws, or are punished for not doing so? Answer – no. The migrant crisis: We watch as the French fail to apply EU laws as the laws don't suite them at the moment. The French allow migrants to set up camp to daily try to force their way into a sovereign territory that has rejected their 'application to enter' instead of processing them as require by EU law. Other MS simply wave them through, contrary to EU law. Other MS refuse to share the burden and erect razor wire border fences. Germany has run an illegal trade surplus for many years, other countries run up illegal deficits, all ignored of course.

12. Do we need the EU to alleviating a skills shortage in the UK? Answer – no. Our current immigration laws allow people with skills to enter and work in the UK. The EU just allows a million low skilled workers to come to the UK to take low paid jobs.

13. Is inward investment into the UK reliant on EU membership? Answer – no. Inward investment into the UK continues to grow after the Brexit vote.

SO, WHY ARE WE A MEMBER STATE? ANYONE

Because of the 13 paragraphs let me answer step by step.

 

It sometimes helps to remind ourselves why we voted out.

This from a letter in the DT

 

DT = Daily Telegraph(?) once called „Torygraph“; „notable“ columnist: Boris Johnson, besides Trump the liar of the year.

People, who aren't able to think by themselves or don't know about details of some subjects written in paragraphs of media articles, believe all is true. Then you read the nonsense above.

 

Why we should leave the EU (or what do we get in return for our EU membership fee?). In return for the £12,000 million here are a few of the things we could have done without the EU, and a few to look forward to if we don’t leave:

 

In normal life there is no half-truth, but the Brexit friends like/d the alternative facts. Fact is – National Audit Office stated, in 2014, the UK payed €14,100m (already reduced by a rebate of €7,100m) and received ~€7,000m. That's €7,100 or ~£5,700m net. Johnson said/lied: £350m weakly; fact £109,6m weakly. But the Brexiteers believe/d in him like the Muslims in Mohamed and the Koran.

The price for leaving should remember you on a situation in a pub. You order 28 glasses of beer for 27 guests and yourself . When you leave the pub ahaed of scedule wouldn't you have to pay for your order? It's the same what the EU is demanding for (the ordered and drunken beer).

 

[puck2]

1.

Would we have been able to destroy our UK fishing industry if we had not been in the EU? Answer - yes, but we wouldn't.

CAP, an EU policy, was introduced to protect agriculture and fishery against bad maneuvers, as i.e. over fishing. The concerned got compensated by the EU. The ravenous UK fishery has been protected by the EU, not destroyed. Therefore the fisher-boats had to be reduced.

2.

Would we have been able to forge free trade agreements with any country we liked on our terms, including the EU block, if we had not been in the EU - answer yes, of course.

Yes of course, not only for cherry-picking, but to the advantage of both sides; normally not satisfying all parts of each side. Norway has to pay, but isn't able to influence the EU policy.

 

3.

Would we have massive immigration and have no legal ability to deny benefits to those immigrants, even though they have not contributed, if we had not been in the EU? Answer – no.

The egocentric style of the Old British Empire, take off and don't give away. In the colonial time it plundered a lot of goods and money just of some states from where the people are migrating/fleeing. Of course, moral doesn't belong anymore to politics, only money. Yes? Immigrants pay back in the second or third generation, not all. Look at the USA (and ironically at Trump from Scotland 555).

[puck2]

4. Would we have paid our farmers to leave fields fallow, give massive subsidies to large unproductive land owners such as the royal family, whilst importing massive amounts of food, if we had not been in the EU? Answer – of course not.

DT doesn't know anything about CAP (Common Agricultural Policy). Look at #1. Otherwise UK would be a desert within 200 years, maybe. That would be sad history (killing themselves).

5. Would UK nationals have been able to settle in other EU countries if we were not in the EU? Answer - yes, but not if you came with nothing and expected to be provided with a living for nothing, which is the situation elsewhere in the world, not just in the EU.

Like a poodle following Bush in the Iraq War, however no money problem for the UK. But for humanity - budget should be closed. Aren't there a lot of people of ME areas, Asia and Africa, coming to the UK which was active in the unlawful Iraq War and other parts in the world?

6.

Are we destroying our right of self-determination? Answer – yes we are. The Europarl contribution? The toothless body can't change a thing Brussels decides to do. "The European Parliament may approve or reject a legislative proposal, or propose amendments to it. The Council is not legally obliged to take account of Parliament's opinion but in line with the case-law of the Court of Justice, it must not take a decision without having received it".

If you want to be a part of a community/union you have to relinquish some parts of your sovereignty. A normal situation. Or you shouldn't have joint it. You lose something, but you can/will win more important things. In such a community it's not all as at home with mamma.That's the reason, why …. .

[puck2]

7. Laws: I want my laws made by the body I have a say in electing, not a group of unelected people in Brussels pandering to the requirements of Germany and France and voting down UK objections every time under the majority voting system. There are now more than 40,000 legal acts in the EU. There are also 15,000 Court verdicts and 62,000 international standards, all of which must be respected and obeyed by all citizens and companies in the EU.

Pandering to the requirements of Germany and France and every time? What a prejudice. Seriously answer my question: do you believe that France and Germany decide alone on the EU laws? Prejudice prevails.

Ridiculous, when you compare more than 40,000 legal acts in the EU it with them in the UK. Google 'court statistics in the UK'. UK is nearly the winner.

Standards. Do you want to export goods to the EU made with the UK measurement system? Standards save money and time. Good luck for the UK industry and bureaucracy after Brexit.

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, puck2 said:

 

 

Pandering to the requirements of Germany and France and every time? What a prejudice. Seriously answer my question: do you believe that France and Germany decide alone on the EU laws? Prejudice prevails.

Ridiculous, when you compare more than 40,000 legal acts in the EU it with them in the UK. Google 'court statistics in the UK'. UK is nearly the winner.

Standards. Do you want to export goods to the EU made with the UK measurement system? Standards save money and time. Good luck for the UK industry and bureaucracy after Brexit.

Please stop posting this slurry, it will make you very ill. 

[puck2]

8. Will we be able to set our own foreign policy in future? Answer - not if the EU gets its way. Military: if the EU has the army as it wants, and national armies cease to exist as the EU wants, and foreign policy is set by Brussels that may or may not reflect the needs and aspirations of UK as the EU wants, who would control this army? Who would it fight for? What happens if the UK disagrees but is voted down? What happens to the UK nuclear deterrent?

Yes, your UK policy wouldn't prevent you following into the next war i.e.in Iran, this time initiated by Trump?. The EU would NOT follow. Good idea!

The UK nuclear deterrent makes other nations so afraid that they never will start a war! Be it in East-Ukraine, Iran, Yemen, Falklands, „Kurdistan“ or maybe in the future in the Antarctic. (end of irony). I guess an EU defense minister will not have the power alone t o start a war or press the A-bottom, if available. An EU defense system would save All countries a lot of money for needless weapons and would be more respected than the national (UK) defense/war powers.

[puck2]

9. Is the EU an institution that treats all members fairly and equitably? Answer – no it isn’t. the Greeks remember when they couldn't access any of their money a few months ago, and this was entirely due to the ECB flexing its muscles to coerce the Greek government into doing as it was told!

 

Then you defend the Greek attitude of lying and not abiding by contracts? (as they did entering the EU). The Greeks lived beyond their means, before the crash and didn't want to relinquish their lives style they got used to – at the cost of the EU members. If you make contracts you have to fulfill them. Normal standard, but not for the Brexiteers, it seems.

[puck2]

10. Can we set our own financial policy in the future? Not within the EU. We will be required to join the Euro this decade by EU law. The EU wants a common financial policy and common tax rates, set by the ECB.

 

Again, pure speculation, not (yet) reality. Some countries oppose this idea. I guess the ECB will never be allowed to fix tax rates. Not the duty of a bank.

In general a good idea if some special and healthy conditions are fulfilled by all members. You don't want to play lottery with the state money. There must be standards or there will be crashes as in Greece. The real problem is, the ECB and the EU are soft like a pudding in this field.

 

Different tax rates in general is cherry picking. Starting inequality and fights within the members, just as now.

[puck2]

11. Do all MS obey the EU laws, or are punished for not doing so? Answer – no. The migrant crisis: We watch as the French fail to apply EU laws as the laws don't suite them at the moment. The French allow migrants to set up camp to daily try to force their way into a sovereign territory that has rejected their 'application to enter' instead of processing them as require by EU law. Other MS simply wave them through, contrary to EU law. Other MS refuse to share the burden and erect razor wire border fences. Germany has run an illegal trade surplus for many years, other countries run up illegal deficits, all ignored of course.

There are two sides of the coin in the case of migration. Law and humanity. It is right that most states don't abide by the law because of national interests and other selfish reasons. It's easy for the UK island to claim adhering to the law, on the continent not. On the other side, the UK will have a problem, if the EU adheres to the law concerning the borderline between EU and UK in Ireland. It would be nonsense and awful for the people there to follow the „law“. Law nowhere is perfect for all people. France already is the home of many Maghreb people.

 

However I agree that the EU cannot be the home of all refugees, migrants and specially economic migrants.

 

Is the DT writer able to show us why Germany has an illegal trade surplus? By which law? Assumed the UK would have a trade surplus, would it be illegal, to? Once the British have been famous for their objectivity.

[puck2]

12. Do we need the EU to alleviating a skills shortage in the UK? Answer – no. Our current immigration laws allow people with skills to enter and work in the UK. The EU just allows a million low skilled workers to come to the UK to take low paid jobs.

 

The UK should not do what is normal for the USA. Cherry picking the skilled workers. The UK has profited from colonies and occupied areas. Giving something back shouldn't be impossible.

[puck2]

12. Is inward investment into the UK reliant on EU membership? Answer – no. Inward investment into the UK continues to grow after the Brexit vote.

 

Inward investment continues? That's the reason why so many companies are reluctant to invest or start changing to the EU mainland (irony). Maybe tax reduction to 10 – 15% will be attractive. But the termination of „passporting“ will not enjoy the banks and financial industry. Only one example. So there will be more „outward“ investment than inward.

[puck2]

30 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Please stop posting this slurry, it will make you very ill. 

People who are not able to deliver some (opposite) facts like to answer in your noble style.

[Khun Han]

Crikey, puck2, flooding the forum with that type of stuff doesn't help anybody, especially yourself.

[aright]

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

Please stop posting this slurry, it will make you very ill. 

I admire your self control however a stronger word than slurry would have been more appropriate 

[3NUMBAS]

that senile old fool just wont accept a democratic outcome of leavers voted to get out..

disaster looms for him at the next election when libdems get flushed down the lav

[aright]

4 hours ago, Grouse said:

Statistical analysis demonstrated a direct correlation between level of education attained and voting remain.

 

For those statistically challenged here is a Poisson distribution

 

 

Rubbish. The Poisson Distribution proves nothing . You need to use the Pareto Curve 

 

 

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, puck2 said:

People who are not able to deliver some (opposite) facts like to answer in your noble style.

New topic but SOS. Look at the other Brexit topics on here if you want to. It's all been done to death already. If you were truly concerned about facts and if you actually looked at what you have written, then you wouldn't post any of this sap.

 

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, puck2 said:

 

 

Yes, your UK policy wouldn't prevent you following into the next war i.e.in Iran, this time initiated by Trump?. The EU would NOT follow. Good idea!

The UK nuclear deterrent makes other nations so afraid that they never will start a war! Be it in East-Ukraine, Iran, Yemen, Falklands, „Kurdistan“ or maybe in the future in the Antarctic. (end of irony). I guess an EU defense minister will not have the power alone t o start a war or press the A-bottom, if available. An EU defense system would save All countries a lot of money for needless weapons and would be more respected than the national (UK) defense/war powers.

A BOTTOM  priceless  

[aright]

What's the difference between ignorance and apathy?

I don't know and I don't care....so there

[rhodie]

So the guy who lost says disaster looms! Who could have predicted that! 

[Laughing Gravy]

10 hours ago, Grouse said:

Statistical analysis demonstrated a direct correlation between level of education attained and voting remain.

 

For those statistically challenged here is a Poisson distribution

 

 

I see your arrogance and self importance is still astounding. I have said before all my friends who voted for remain where university educated. So your statistical analysis can go with your repeated chant,  of how superior you are. Yes you have an opinion like I. so do others but to infer that educated people voted to remain and those who are not to leave really does show an innate superiority. Yes you can swear in Latin but in my eyes it doesn't make you educated.

 

 

[Scott]

Continue baiting and trolling and you will receive a suspension.  

[adammike]

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

A BOTTOM  priceless  

Press the A bottom and get your money back.

[bert bloggs]

Well i voted to leave ,  ,i only went to a public school , ,then got 8 o,levels and 3 a's , i have money to support me and my wife ,both my son and daughter have great jobs , 

does that make me stupid? 

by the way ,we were told that the city of London business would all go abroad , i see today in the news that the city has actually expanded by adding to the workforce . .

 

[aright]

Its important to recognise when someone is pulling on your veiny bang stick.

[Grouse]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/eu-referendum-how-the-results-compare-to-the-uks-educated-old-an/

 

This is what the Telegraph stated on the issue.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution

 

And this explains a Gaussian or Normal distribution

 

There are outliers of course. I am 63 and voted remain. However the correlations are real.

 

https://www.mathsisfun.com/data/correlation.html

 

Remember, correlation is NOT causation!

 

I have no desire to insult or annoy anyone. However the facts are there. I am not baiting or trolling but I would like the truth to be understood. It's important.

 

Jacob Rees Mogg is a Brexiter. He is well educated. He is an outlier.

 

OK now? If not, sorry but I give up.

 

BTW Poisson distribution was a witticism for the hard of hearing.

 

 

[aright]

17 minutes ago, Grouse said:

 I would like the truth to be understood. It's important.

It's not in the least bit important. Publishing demographs of what happened is water under the bridge. What's important was the referendum outcome; and the argument with Remainers is as a result of them trying to taint the outcome with spurious claims about the electorates IQ and their manifesto. Even if the claims are half true its not going to change the outcome.

The tragedy is that the Remainer's are intelligent people and if they stopped their sniping and applied their minds, and made a contribution, to the type of Britain they would like to see after Brexit, the UK and Europe would be better off.