Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[Grouse]

JRM is on BBC Any Questions

 

Well worth a listen

[soalbundy]

1 minute ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

The terms of the referendum did not state that the vote, either for or against needed to be overwhelming, simply that it needed to be a decisive majority, which it was.

 

The reason that the country is divided is because people like your good self and likeminded others, refuse to accept the result of a democratic referendum, in which the decisive majority voted to leave the EU. The country will remain divided unless people like yourself are prepared to accept the democratic result of the referendum. It is up to you, people that have accepted the decision cannot heal the division, only people like yourself can …… but I shan't be holding my breath in anticipation

Well we shall see up til now the fat lady is still singing and it looks to be a long song.

[Grouse]

2 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

The terms of the referendum did not state that the vote, either for or against needed to be overwhelming, simply that it needed to be a decisive majority, which it was.

 

The reason that the country is divided is because people like your good self and likeminded others, refuse to accept the result of a democratic referendum, in which the decisive majority voted to leave the EU. The country will remain divided unless people like yourself are prepared to accept the democratic result of the referendum. It is up to you, people that have accepted the decision cannot heal the division, only people like yourself can …… but I shan't be holding my breath in anticipation

You labour under the misapprehension that the majority is always correct. This is why we have a representative democracy. David Cameron made a huge error of judgment firstly by calling a referendum and secondly by not calling for a super majority.

 

One thing we have learnt is that a majority of the British electorate are not very bright.

[The Renegade]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

One thing we have learnt is that a majority of the British electorate are not very bright.

The only people who are not very bright, are people who cannot understand

 

Quote

On the 23rd June 2016, over a million more people voted to leave the EU than those that voted remain.

 

On the 1st February 2017, 329 MP's voted to trigger Article 50, 112 voted against triggering Article 50.

 

Democracy in action.

It would appear that the group that you label as '' not very bright '' are remainers.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

7 hours ago, tebee said:

I have a feeling things have changed this week with Brexit. In the years to come (if anyone can be bothered) we’ll likely look back on this week as the week that Brexit 1.0 (The 3 Red Lines) expired. However it’s choreographed, unless there is a major political event in the next few lines (eg. all the Brexit ministers resigning), we are likely headed for a much longer stand-still transition. I appreciate that’s not how the current bout of political wriggling is being badged (a Customs Union partial regulatory whole UK thingummybob) but that’s the likelihood, and once we’re in a much longer continuity period (albeit without representation), whither the grand Brexit plan?

Time will tell but the probability of a swashbuckling, free-trading, buccaneering, clean break has faded to virtual insignificance. So what’s happened? After all, we’ve spent the last year being told repeatedly that Brexit means Brexit means the 3 Red Lines Brexit and any other Brexit simply isn’t Brexit.

A good argument is that the current Brexit plan was fatally flawed from the moment the words ‘3 red lines’ were uttered (let’s call it Lancaster House for convenience), the magnificent irony is that the fatal flaw wasn’t so much the red lines themselves (after all, we could have drifted into a somnolent autarky), but the insistence that this recast relationship with the EU could be easily accompanied by a frictionless economic relationship that would preserve the benefits of the SM.

 

This objective, a foundational underpinning of the Vote Leave campaign (like so much else of Lancaster House), has proved to be unachievable. This should not be a surprise. An economic relationship founded on recognition vs harmonisation was sufficiently inimical to the Single Market to be rejected immediately, in addition to this fundamental flaw, there have been a series of tactical blunders that have made an already difficult situation impossible. As many have said, the decision to start the A50 clock not just without a plan, but with a series of objectives that were unachievable seems to have been uniquely designed to undermine an already weak negotiating position. The snap GE result has been perhaps the highest (lowest?) moment of self-owning farce, managing to combine fantastical objectives and a weak external negotiating position with the loss of the Parliamentary majority.

Surely, this should have been the moment for the govt to change it’s Brexit course. But, no, the govt’s inability to of its own volition materially change course away from the 3 red lines is one of the most striking aspects of the Brexit 1.0 debacle. Why? The conflation of the 3 Red Lines Brexit with the success of Brexit (ie no other Brexit counts) - a huge tactical mistake. In effect, the govt managed to tie itself so firmly to this specific Brexit, that it became virtually impossible to shift position unless (effectively) forced by the EU. The worst of all possible worlds.

The final irony is that by pursuing a hard Brexit that was never going to work, the govt has managed to conjure an outcome uniquely unappealing to both Remainers and Leavers. And so, our relationship with the EU, the great issue of our time meant to have been resolved by the referendum, will now be even more confused than ever. The country is divided, nothing is resolved.

Expect another referendum, whether it’s in the next 6 months,  in two years or 5 years.

 

What an incredibly speculative and depressing comment

 

I bet you could take all the fun out of a bouncy castle ??  ??  ✌️?

[tebee]

11 minutes ago, Grouse said:

You labour under the misapprehension that the majority is always correct. This is why we have a representative democracy. David Cameron made a huge error of judgment firstly by calling a referendum and secondly by not calling for a super majority.

 

One thing we have learnt is that a majority of the British electorate are not very bright.

To be fair, the complexities of things like  the way businesses work these days and what trade agreements are things not understood by many, including many "experts"  We rely on others to interpret those for us. We run into problems when the media doesn't understand them either  and presents inaccurate or simply mendacious testimony as fact.

 

There is little incentive now not to lie so vast swathes of people were misinformed .

 

It is only now these lies are running headfirst into the wall of reality.

     

[tebee]

2 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

What an incredibly speculative and depressing comment

 

I bet you could take all the fun out of a bouncy castle ??  ??  ✌️?

I only need a pin....

[soalbundy]

16 minutes ago, Grouse said:

You labour under the misapprehension that the majority is always correct. This is why we have a representative democracy. David Cameron made a huge error of judgment firstly by calling a referendum and secondly by not calling for a super majority.

 

One thing we have learnt is that a majority of the British electorate are not very bright.

I think it's fair to say that the majority of the electorate in any country is not very bright.The people will always look for the goodies in a manifesto without thinking of the consequences or if the goodies can be delivered, we aren't very far away from the politics of ancient Rome, bread and circus. The electorate want to be fooled and politicians oblige with lies and things that they can't deliver, luckily for them the electorate has a poor memory and can be won over with baby kissing or a nice smile and of course the greatest of evils, patriotism, 'make America great again' was sure to be a winner.

[Orac]

6 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

Brexit is a pity for many uk citizens who like to be on the beach. As an EU citizen you can live in greece, italy, spain or portugal. You can buy a house or a flat there. You can open a business or work there.

No visa stress. Not nearly as complicated as in Thailand. Annoying for many, because no one knows at present how the laws look after brexit. Pity for the many young uk citizens. Probably less options.

 

I believe the Brexiteers already have a plan for this 

 

https://youtu.be/_kzpHzUJCd4

[soalbundy]

12 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

What an incredibly speculative and depressing comment

 

I bet you could take all the fun out of a bouncy castle ??  ??  ✌️?

but it would be a good bouncy castle which wouldn't be blown away by the wind.

[billd766]

14 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

err not so quickly we're not talking about his kids but about him  - fake news call unproven. ! Anyway I wouldn't believe a word that comes out of his fag stinking EU-pensioned mouth and getting Eu passports for his kids personally - jeez how much do they have to rub your noses in the dirt before you get you are being played. 

 

https://www.politico.eu/article/is-nigel-farage-applying-for-german-citizenship-brexit-consequences-ukip-europe/

 

The article headline says quote "Is Nigel Farage applying for German citizenship?"

 

By PAUL DALLISON

8/16/16, 6:01 PM CET

 

Updated 8/18/16, 5:09 PM CET

Former UKIP leader and leading Brexiteer Nigel Farage refused to deny claims that he was seeking German citizenship after being spotted at the German embassy in London.

 

A Facebook user reportedly saw Farage — whose wife Kirsten Mehr is German — in line at the embassy and wondered if the MEP was hoping to secure dual citizenship for himself or his family.

 

When asked about the claims by Buzzfeed, Farage said “none of your business” and hung up the phone.

 

It does NOT say that he is applying for German citizenship.

 

I think that what Nigel Farage reputedly said to Buzzfeed was correct. It IS none of their business.

 

"A Facebook user reportedly saw Farage — whose wife Kirsten Mehr is German — in line at the embassy and wondered if the MEP was hoping to secure dual citizenship for himself or his family.

 

And this is supposed to be reporting at its best?

[Grouse]

58 minutes ago, tebee said:

To be fair, the complexities of things like  the way businesses work these days and what trade agreements are things not understood by many, including many "experts"  We rely on others to interpret those for us. We run into problems when the media doesn't understand them either  and presents inaccurate or simply mendacious testimony as fact.

 

There is little incentive now not to lie so vast swathes of people were misinformed .

 

It is only now these lies are running headfirst into the wall of reality.

     

Correct. This why we have representative democracy. MPs have all the resources and support to make informed decisions. "Fag Ash Lil" may not be so well informed.

 

But the other issue is that. As stated previously, we used to discuss pros and cons, shades of grey. However many seem locked into positions regardless of what we have learnt over the past two years. At the start I was 60:40 remain but as I've learned about JIT for automanufacturing, the Irish border issue and the risk to the environment, labour law and many others, I am now at 90:10. There are still many things I am not happy with but better to sort these out from inside the tent.

[billd766]

2 hours ago, soalbundy said:

That isn't the point, it doesn't feel decisive, hence the divide.

 

That IS the point. It was decisive accordind to the way that the referendum was set up. If you and the Remainers feel that the simple majority was wrong then you should have petitioned your MP long BEFORE the referendum to change the rules.

 

You seem to think that 4% is not a lot. Consider then that the Leave vote exceeded the Remain vote by brexit referendum by 1,269.501 votes.

 

To me that looks and feels very decisive.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

but it would be a good bouncy castle which wouldn't be blown away by the wind.

A safety standard has been set (EU EN 14960 -2013), which has been accepted by all European countries and the IIHF recommends that all bouncy castles be manufactured and tested to this standard. ?

 

I trust the EU more than the UK government 

 

Just look at Grenfell Tower farce. The cladding was not used in accordance with the manufacturers instructions (only suitable for 2 stories) and still I see no signs of culpable homicide. Typical UK.

Edited May 19, 2018 by Grouse

[transam]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

A safety standard has been set (EU EN 14960 -2013), which has been accepted by all European countries and the IIHF recommends that all bouncy castles be manufactured and tested to this standard. ?

 

I trust the EU more than the UK government 

 

Just look at Grenfell Tower farce. The cladding was not used in accordance with the manufacturers instructions (only suitable for 2 stories) and still I see no signs of culpable homicide. Typical UK.

Local council engineers I think were not paying attention.....

[tebee]

We are very sorry to break it to you, but there is some bad news on the UK government’s Brexit approach.

 

It has been fashionable to compare aspects of the UK government’s Brexit approach to Schrödinger’s thought experiment about the cat in a steel chamber that is simultaneously alive and dead. Like the eponymous feline, the government’s approach could be considered both ‘alive’ in the sense that it was being energetically pursued and at the same time ‘dead’ because it was impossible to achieve. We can now bring an update on the cat. Unfortunately, there is some very bad news. The steel chamber has been opened. The cat has passed away.

 

The government’s Brexit approach was fatally flawed from the start. Designed to appeal to as many Leave voters as possible, it combined control (the three red lines) with the promise of a frictionless relationship with the EU. The theory was that the EU’s economic interest was so strong that political considerations would be swept aside and agreement swiftly reached.

Much like the cat, this plan has not aged well. Ironically, the core problem was not, in fact, the three red lines. After all, the UK could have drifted into a green and unpleasant autarky - grow more vegetables, grow more doctors, fracking - with its red lines kept intact. The plan’s fatal flaw was its aspiration for a future economic relationship whose basis was so inimical to the Single Market that the EU had little choice but to reject it out of hand.

 

Like the unfortunate cat, the government’s approach to Brexit was not able to survive even cursory observation. Identifying the precise point of its demise is difficult, but there are some obvious moments. Cynics might point to the EU’s negative response to the aspirations of the ill-fated Lancaster House speech. Other possibilities include the UK’s agreement to the Irish border back-stop option, or, more prosaically, the point at which the words ‘as’ and ‘as possible’ were inserted before and after ‘frictionless.’

[Grouse]

4 minutes ago, transam said:

Local council engineers I think were not paying attention.....

The brochure for the precise material used is easily available on line. It even gives a diagram of a tower block to show which materials are suitable according to height. It looks clear that a decision was taken to go with the unsuitable cheapest option. In engineering design there are always several levels of sign off to avoid design errors getting through to site. Impossible for a glaring error like this to have escaped.

 

Finally, what do they understand about flammability and combustability? There are already standards in place. Are we saying timber cladding should be outlawed? 

[Grouse]

5 minutes ago, tebee said:

We are very sorry to break it to you, but there is some bad news on the UK government’s Brexit approach.

 

It has been fashionable to compare aspects of the UK government’s Brexit approach to Schrödinger’s thought experiment about the cat in a steel chamber that is simultaneously alive and dead. Like the eponymous feline, the government’s approach could be considered both ‘alive’ in the sense that it was being energetically pursued and at the same time ‘dead’ because it was impossible to achieve. We can now bring an update on the cat. Unfortunately, there is some very bad news. The steel chamber has been opened. The cat has passed away.

 

The government’s Brexit approach was fatally flawed from the start. Designed to appeal to as many Leave voters as possible, it combined control (the three red lines) with the promise of a frictionless relationship with the EU. The theory was that the EU’s economic interest was so strong that political considerations would be swept aside and agreement swiftly reached.

Much like the cat, this plan has not aged well. Ironically, the core problem was not, in fact, the three red lines. After all, the UK could have drifted into a green and unpleasant autarky - grow more vegetables, grow more doctors, fracking - with its red lines kept intact. The plan’s fatal flaw was its aspiration for a future economic relationship whose basis was so inimical to the Single Market that the EU had little choice but to reject it out of hand.

 

Like the unfortunate cat, the government’s approach to Brexit was not able to survive even cursory observation. Identifying the precise point of its demise is difficult, but there are some obvious moments. Cynics might point to the EU’s negative response to the aspirations of the ill-fated Lancaster House speech. Other possibilities include the UK’s agreement to the Irish border back-stop option, or, more prosaically, the point at which the words ‘as’ and ‘as possible’ were inserted before and after ‘frictionless.’

Indeed! Collapse of Theresa's Wave Function. The next wave will be bye bye ? 

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

You labour under the misapprehension that the majority is always correct. This is why we have a representative democracy. David Cameron made a huge error of judgment firstly by calling a referendum and secondly by not calling for a super majority.

 

One thing we have learnt is that a majority of the British electorate are not very bright.

Same old.......

 

The result of the referendum itself demonstrates how much such a vote was needed. Cameron is held to have "made a huge error of judgment" only by those who hate the fact that the referendum was called in the first place (almost as much as they hate the result). The Referendum Act passed easily by 544-53 and easily passed through the House of Lords, receiving Royal Assent soon thereafter.

 

Cameron was guilty of gross overconfidence, the prime reason why there was never an exit plan. Now the large blocks of MPs and so-called Lords, who voted for the referendum and are almost all aligned to parties that supported leaving the EU in their 2017 party election manifestos, are now fully exposed as the obstructive, self-interested Europhiles that they have always been. 

 

So, might the real lesson to be learnt be that a majority of Lords and MPs may not be as bright as the average British voter?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 19, 2018 by nauseus

[transam]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

You labour under the misapprehension that the majority is always correct. This is why we have a representative democracy. David Cameron made a huge error of judgment firstly by calling a referendum and secondly by not calling for a super majority.

 

One thing we have learnt is that a majority of the British electorate are not very bright.

Perhaps you're British not very bright did not vote, I reckon those those who were  bright made the effort..Hence the result....You were out voted by bright folk...

[transam]

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

You labour under the misapprehension that the majority is always correct. This is why we have a representative democracy. David Cameron made a huge error of judgment firstly by calling a referendum and secondly by not calling for a super majority.

 

One thing we have learnt is that a majority of the British electorate are not very bright.

Am sure those do not vote......

 

 

[nauseus]

40 minutes ago, tebee said:

We are very sorry to break it to you, but there is some bad news on the UK government’s Brexit approach.

 

It has been fashionable to compare aspects of the UK government’s Brexit approach to Schrödinger’s thought experiment about the cat in a steel chamber that is simultaneously alive and dead. Like the eponymous feline, the government’s approach could be considered both ‘alive’ in the sense that it was being energetically pursued and at the same time ‘dead’ because it was impossible to achieve. We can now bring an update on the cat. Unfortunately, there is some very bad news. The steel chamber has been opened. The cat has passed away.

 

The government’s Brexit approach was fatally flawed from the start. Designed to appeal to as many Leave voters as possible, it combined control (the three red lines) with the promise of a frictionless relationship with the EU. The theory was that the EU’s economic interest was so strong that political considerations would be swept aside and agreement swiftly reached.

Much like the cat, this plan has not aged well. Ironically, the core problem was not, in fact, the three red lines. After all, the UK could have drifted into a green and unpleasant autarky - grow more vegetables, grow more doctors, fracking - with its red lines kept intact. The plan’s fatal flaw was its aspiration for a future economic relationship whose basis was so inimical to the Single Market that the EU had little choice but to reject it out of hand.

 

Like the unfortunate cat, the government’s approach to Brexit was not able to survive even cursory observation. Identifying the precise point of its demise is difficult, but there are some obvious moments. Cynics might point to the EU’s negative response to the aspirations of the ill-fated Lancaster House speech. Other possibilities include the UK’s agreement to the Irish border back-stop option, or, more prosaically, the point at which the words ‘as’ and ‘as possible’ were inserted before and after ‘frictionless.’

 

Firstly, the Brexit negotiations are not done yet but it is posts like this that assume failure (probably in hope).

 

The Lancaster House speech had to be hopeful that a mutual desire for a sensible withdrawal might mitigate any damage done due to Brexit. At the moment it seems that will not be possible, unfortunately. The EU does not seem to want to 'negotiate' in the true sense of the word; it prefers to dictate. But we new that before the referendum. 

[transam]

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Firstly, the Brexit negotiations are not done yet but it is posts like this that assume failure (probably in hope).

 

The Lancaster House speech had to be hopeful that a mutual desire for a sensible withdrawal might mitigate any damage done due to Brexit. At the moment it seems that will not be possible, unfortunately. The EU does not seem to want to 'negotiate' in the true sense of the word; it prefers to dictate. But we new that before the referendum. 

I would be pissed off with a monthly payment loss too...

[aright]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Correct. This why we have representative democracy. MPs have all the resources and support to make informed decisions.

 

 There are still many things I am not happy with but better to sort these out from inside the tent.

From your perspective why do MP's keep getting it so wrong then  as evidenced by them overwhelmingly endorsing Article 50.

At the moment it would appear the only people trying to change things from inside the tent are extreme right wing parties. What party do you belong to? 

Have to go ,I haven't finished my best man speech yet. 

[HAKAPALITA]

Never understand Brits.Why didn’t you join a Australia,American , Canadian, NZ type alliance , with folks who liked you, but you joined Europe who has done nothing but try to .invaded You.Wake up this is just the same in a new Trojan Horse.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[The Renegade]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

We are very sorry to break it to you, but there is some bad news on the UK government’s Brexit approach.

Sorry to disappoint you, but you are not breaking any news.

 

We know the Governments approach is wrong. It is wrong because Theresa May is a remainer and is trying to her best to keep the UK attached at the hip with the EU, by negotiating some fantasy deal that does not exist because the EU's goal is keeping the UK under the control of Brussels and the ECJ.

 

The Brexit approach should have been short and very sharp. Referendum - Article 50 invoked - Leave EU and WTO rules apply.

 

Now when you are ready and feel up to discussing something better than WTO rules, come and speak to us.

[transam]

10 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Never understand Brits.Why didn’t you join a Australia,American , Canadian, NZ type alliance , with folks who liked you, but you joined Europe who has done nothing but try to .invaded You.Wake up this is just the same in a new Trojan Horse.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

 

[beautifulthailand99]

4 hours ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Well buddy / bundy, I’m afraid it is very much the point; you said you would like to see a decisive majority, which is exactly what you / we got. I cannot be responsible for the fact that it doesn't feel like it to you.

 

When you start to deny the factual because it don't feel right to you, we enter a separate dimension, one in which it is difficult to debate reasonably

We are already feeling the pound rinse we will all feel it more - that is real. Well done fellas I raise my glass three quarters full to your goodwork !  The pre-Brexit of 50 + baht now feels like a result though how we winged then. The pound fall does has some good effects though - we are spending more time in the UK spending our pounds there and helping the economy there rather than going abroad and realising how poor we are becoming. You guys out in LoS you are on the front line though so your self-sacrifice for the nation is much appreciated.

 

Good morning - beautiful day in Blighty.

[oldhippy]

48 minutes ago, HAKAPALITA said:

Never understand Brits.Why didn’t you join a Australia,American , Canadian, NZ type alliance , with folks who liked you, but you joined Europe who has done nothing but try to .invaded You.Wake up this is just the same in a new Trojan Horse.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

I like the analogy.

But did those inside the horse come to destroy the good old insular life style, or did they come as liberators?

And while we are in Geece.

Some posters used the word sycophant. Sounds like like MP Smugg vocabulary....

[HAKAPALITA]

32 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

We are already feeling the pound rinse we will all feel it more - that is real. Well done fellas I raise my glass three quarters full to your goodwork !  The pre-Brexit of 50 + baht now feels like a result though how we winged then. The pound fall does has some good effects though - we are spending more time in the UK spending our pounds there and helping the economy there rather than going abroad and realising how poor we are becoming. You guys out in LoS you are on the front line though so your self-sacrifice for the nation is much appreciated.

 

Good morning - beautiful day in Blighty.

Some of our mixed group of Ferangs here are quite pleased at the Pound drop, as with all Europeans it gets rid of the Cheap Charlies. Only ones we feel sorry for are the genuine ones who not save enough to retire easy, or but nice house here for Thai Family and pension small for Englishman yet big for German and Europe generally. Did You realy win WW2.?.