SURVEY: Brexit -- Good or Bad Idea?

[phutoie2]

1 hour ago, shanesox said:

Quoting the Guardian and the sources of info it uses isnt really serious when it comes to this issue! The rag has been completely unbalanced since before the referendum !


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Rhubarb, I trust it more than the Daily Brexit, or Daily Farage.

[Grouse]

22 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Who needs the EU or anything coming from it. The Germans can keep their cars and close their factories.

China makes everything these days and I'm betting it will be happy to sell direct to the UK, cheaper than via the current rebranding fraud in the EU countries.

Clothing/footwear made in the EU? You're having a laugh, that comes from China/India/Vietnam.

What EU country grows tobacco?

 

Sink the ferries, close the tunnel, tell them to do one ...... job done.

And that, sums up nicely the erudition of the typical Brexiter.

 

What was Jethro Tull's 1971 album called again?

Edited October 17, 2017 by Grouse

[stephenterry]

1 hour ago, baansgr said:

This ridiculous argument has been debated a thousand times and you really need to understand how democracy works. Bit like Tony Blair getting rid of double jeopardy, if its the not outcome you like lets try try and try again till we get what we want.....thats facism buddy, maybe now you will understand why people voted to leave

 

Let's make one thing clear. The referendum did not hold the government to any action whatever the result. A democratic decision would have been to debate the result in parliament. That might have resulted in parliament accepting that Brexit would be the way forward, but conditional upon the government setting out the financial impact, and a cost benefit analysis of what it could mean to the UK.  As at today this hasn't happened, which is both disgraceful and morally corrupt by this so called democratic government.

 

But no, May took it upon herself to invoke Article 50, using the statistically incorrect terminology 'will of the people' without any safeguards or understanding of what would arise - this could not be regarded as a democratic decision, but a political one as was the decision to hold an subsequent election to force through Brexit, and following that bribing the DUP to side with the government in order to retain a slight majority.

 

If that's democracy in action by power-hungry politicians, better it be replaced by a parliament that puts people above power.

 

 

  

 

 

[nauseus]

5 hours ago, sirineou said:

Being more educated on a subject does not mean you were uneducated before, it simply means you were less educated, and now you are more.

Education is a lifelong process .

I think you would be disingenuous if you said that you don't know  more about the subject now, than you knew before.

Unless  of course, you have a learning disability, or you knew all there was to know.

 

The only thing I know more about the subject after the referendum is that the remainers are far more hissy in defeat than I expected them to be. Like I said, you inferred (as many have done on here) that leave voters were less educated (sic intelligent) than the other side. That opinion (together with your disability comment) is both insulting, misinformed but typical from someone of your ilk.   

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

 

Let's make one thing clear. The referendum did not hold the government to any action whatever the result. A democratic decision would have been to debate the result in parliament. That might have resulted in parliament accepting that Brexit would be the way forward, but conditional upon the government setting out the financial impact, and a cost benefit analysis of what it could mean to the UK.  As at today this hasn't happened, which is both disgraceful and morally corrupt by this so called democratic government.

 

But no, May took it upon herself to invoke Article 50, using the statistically incorrect terminology 'will of the people' without any safeguards or understanding of what would arise - this could not be regarded as a democratic decision, but a political one as was the decision to hold an subsequent election to force through Brexit, and following that bribing the DUP to side with the government in order to retain a slight majority.

 

If that's democracy in action by power-hungry politicians, better it be replaced by a parliament that puts people above power.

 

 

  

 

 

The promise by government: A once in a generation decision.The referendum on Thursday, 23 June is your chance to decide if we should remain in or leave the European Union.The government believes it is in the best interests of the UK to remain in the EU. This is the way to protect jobs, provide security, and strengthen the UK’s economy for every family in this country – a clear path into the future, in contrast to the uncertainty of leaving.This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.

 

The vote by parliament: 

The European Union Referendum Act 2015 was passed in parliament with a 6-1 majority.

 

Together, these two made the result both morally and constitutionally binding. That's why nobody has tried to challenge the vote, legally. Even even the most rabid remainers can see it. Get over it.

 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2017 by nauseus

[MaeJoMTB]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

And that, sums up nicely the erudition of the typical Brexiter.

 

What was Jethro Tull's 1971 album called again?

Aqualung?

[aright]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

Just like on an aeroplane?

You are so out of touch, keep up to date lad. What abut the Sopwith Camel...you had to open the windows to get to the air conditioning...years ahead of its time

Edited October 17, 2017 by aright

[SheungWan]

On 10/15/2017 at 9:51 AM, Surasak said:

Maybe so,but 21 miles of sea separates us from the mainland of europe.

Believe it or not the nearest UK border re the EU is with Eire and not a lot of sea. This could of course be solved by giving up N.Ireland.

Edited October 17, 2017 by SheungWan

[transam]

11 minutes ago, aright said:

You are so out of touch, keep up to date lad. What abut the Sopwith Camel...you had to open the windows to get to the air conditioning...years ahead of its time

Sopwith Camel never had windows...

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Aqualung?

No, but Locomotive Breath was memorable!

[Khun Han]

5 hours ago, shanesox said:

5 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Just another quote from the Guardian today:
 

"Britain is seeking a post-Brexit trade deal with the EU that involves leaving the single market and the customs’ union but replicates as closely as possible the current system under which there are no tariffs between the UK and the other 27 member states.

But the Resolution Foundation and the university’s UK trade policy observatory examined the consequences of the UK exiting without a deal and imposing the same tariffs on EU goods as it does on imports from the rest of the world.

It said tariffs on dairy products would increase by 45%, those on meat products by 37% and those on clothing, footwear, drink and tobacco by 10%."

 

Will be dismissed though by the pro-Brexit people as 'project fear', who needs experts anyway?

The line that Britain is seeking to leave the single market but wants to stay close to the system order under which there are no tariffs makes me doubt the sense of reality in the pro-Brexit camp.

Quoting the Guardian and the sources of info it uses isnt really serious when it comes to this issue! The rag has been completely unbalanced since before the referendum !

 

Not to mention the fact that, once we exit the EU, we don't have to buy any of those goods from them.

[aright]

25 minutes ago, transam said:

Sopwith Camel never had windows...

What do you think the goggles on the pilots face were?  

[transam]

2 minutes ago, aright said:

What do you think the goggles on the pilots face were?  

Goggles...If you say they are windows then fine by  me...

[Khun Han]

3 hours ago, stephenterry said:

 

Let's make one thing clear. The referendum did not hold the government to any action whatever the result. A democratic decision would have been to debate the result in parliament. That might have resulted in parliament accepting that Brexit would be the way forward, but conditional upon the government setting out the financial impact, and a cost benefit analysis of what it could mean to the UK.  As at today this hasn't happened, which is both disgraceful and morally corrupt by this so called democratic government.

 

But no, May took it upon herself to invoke Article 50, using the statistically incorrect terminology 'will of the people' without any safeguards or understanding of what would arise - this could not be regarded as a democratic decision, but a political one as was the decision to hold an subsequent election to force through Brexit, and following that bribing the DUP to side with the government in order to retain a slight majority.

 

If that's democracy in action by power-hungry politicians, better it be replaced by a parliament that puts people above power.

 

 

  

 

 

 

You can try to cloud the issue all you want. Whilst parliament failed to pass a law making the result of the referendum mandatory, the government stated very clearly that the result would be acted on according to the wishes of the majority. To go back on this would be just about as dishonest and undemocratic as it gets. That's why no-one in a senior position of government was prepared to do so, and why Theresa May made the statement she did after meeting the Queen.

[aright]

KH  time you recognised you are talking to a section of our community who have programmed themselves and our Nation for failure by the consistent use of negative language and words synonymous with defeat and failure and we are only at the first hurdle. They constantly use the language of National and self doubt ........natural pessimists.

Losers have many reasons why they can't do something, winners find a reason why they must. It's a good job many of these people weren't around in 1940.

[MaeJoMTB]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

No, but Locomotive Breath was memorable!

Aqualung was the only album JT released in 1971.

Looks like you know as little about music as you do about Brexit and the EU.

[7by7]

20 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

<snip>

What people do forget is that, in 1973 and 1975 the topic of freedom of labour/movement, along with a lot of other important information, was not widely given to the public, even prior to the 1975 EEC referendum. The UK Gov referendum pamphlet does not mention freedom of movement at all. The content is mostly waffle. Have a read....

 

http://www.harvard-digital.co.uk/euro/pamphlet.htm#8

 

 The 'No' campaign also felt it was not worth mentioning in their information leaflet, which was also distributed to every household in the UK: have a read; Why you should vote NO

[7by7]

21 hours ago, citybiker said:

Ok, I should have clarified.

Uncontrolled enforcement (of UYK immigration) would be more appropriate?

I’m aware protocols, processes etc are in place that have improved yet enforcement?

 Only someone who has never been involved with a UK visa application could say that!

[7by7]

15 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Aqualung was the only album JT released in 1971.

Looks like you know as little about music as you do about Brexit and the EU.

 Locomotive Breath is a track from the album Aqualung!

 

 

 

[Kieran00001]

7 hours ago, baansgr said:

This ridiculous argument has been debated a thousand times and you really need to understand how democracy works. Bit like Tony Blair getting rid of double jeopardy, if its the not outcome you like lets try try and try again till we get what we want.....thats facism buddy, maybe now you will understand why people voted to leave

 

"In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way."

Nigel Farage.

[nauseus]

18 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

 The 'No' campaign also felt it was not worth mentioning in their information leaflet, which was also distributed to every household in the UK: have a read; Why you should vote NO

Thanks for posting this. You are right - no mention of freedom of movement as far as I can see  - it just shows how well this important information was hidden!

 

I have saved this - I missed it in 1975. I'll have a closer read later but for now the rest of the content looks good and is even more valid today. They didn't miss much else. Interesting to see that the trade deficit with the EU was already quite well established (not in favour of the UK) even then!

 

Well done.

Edited October 17, 2017 by nauseus

[Grouse]

36 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Aqualung was the only album JT released in 1971.

Looks like you know as little about music as you do about Brexit and the EU.

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

 

Recorded 1971. Released in UK, March 1972. Pedantry is such an endearing attribute don't you find? 

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, transam said:

Sopwith Camel never had windows...

They certainly didn't - I should know - I used to smoke them.

[riclag]

Not a Brit but American. Your vote to get out is in serious danger.The Obstructionist want to cast aside your vote and  delegitimize the existence of it.

This sounds all to familiar .Stand for nationalism. You tried the EU and it didn't work out,time to control your own destiny again , show the world how great you are !

Cheers     

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, riclag said:

Not a Brit but American. Your vote to get out is in serious danger.The Obstructionist want to cast aside your vote and  delegitimize the existence of it.

This sounds all to familiar .Stand for nationalism. You tried the EU and it didn't work out,time to control your own destiny again , show the world how great you are !

Cheers     

Cheers!

[aright]

3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

They certainly didn't - I should know - I used to smoke them.

Strand man myself "You were never alone with a Grand Strand "

[7by7]

14 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Thanks for posting this. You are right - no mention of freedom of movement as far as I can see  - it just shows how well this important information was hidden!

 

I have saved this - I missed it in 1975. I'll have a closer read later but for now the rest of the content looks good and is even more valid today. They didn't miss much else. Interesting to see that the trade deficit with the EU was already quite well established (not in favour of the UK) even then!

 

Well done.

 Not hidden, just not deemed important enough by the 'No' campaign to be put in their leaflet. But it was covered in the media, I'm sure.

 

In 1957 the Treaty of Rome established the European Economic Community and set out the four fundamental freedoms of the common market: free movement of goods, services, capital and workers. If the 'No' campaign decided not to mention freedom of movement in their literature, it can only be because they did not disagree with the principle, or thought it unimportant.

 

That you missed the 'No' leaflet in 1975 seems improbable as it was delivered to every household in the UK! Maybe your memory of what was said, by both sides, is patchy at best, or you were simply too young to have taken an interest at the time?

 

Personally, I believe that the content of the government's leaflet and that of the 'Yes' campaign, Why you should vote YES, to be as relevant today as they were in 1975; which is why I believe Brexit to be a huge mistake we will come to regret.

 

But we have made our bed, and now must lie on it.

 

 

[Kieran00001]

24 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Thanks for posting this. You are right - no mention of freedom of movement as far as I can see  - it just shows how well this important information was hidden!

 

I have saved this - I missed it in 1975. I'll have a closer read later but for now the rest of the content looks good and is even more valid today. They didn't miss much else. Interesting to see that the trade deficit with the EU was already quite well established (not in favour of the UK) even then!

 

Well done.

 

Freedom of movement goes right back to the Treaty of Paris in 1951, it has hardly been a secret, in fact it is known as the cornerstone of union membership.

 

And it was mentioned on the referendum pamphlet in the form of: 

The aims of the Common Market are:

• To bring together the peoples of Europe.

And it is mentioned in the no pamphlet in the form of:

The real aim of the Market is, of course, to become one single country in which Britain would be reduced to a mere province. 

[Rc2702]

If they get to keep free trade then I would have no issue whatsoever with brexit.

[Kieran00001]

17 minutes ago, riclag said:

Not a Brit but American. Your vote to get out is in serious danger.The Obstructionist want to cast aside your vote and  delegitimize the existence of it.

This sounds all to familiar .Stand for nationalism. You tried the EU and it didn't work out,time to control your own destiny again , show the world how great you are !

Cheers     

 

Refendums are not binding in the UK, only advisory, so they do not have to delegitimise the vote as it never had any legitimacy.  And the EU is working very well, whatever made you think it didn't work out?  The powerful who backed Brexit did so out of their distaste for having their financial transactions taxed, having restrictions put on their dodgy banking practices and out of fear of being dragged before the court of human rights, crooks who want to be able to live with impunity but who have successfully gotten some common people behind them in the guise that Brexit was for the benefit of the common man.