Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[RuamRudy]

20 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Both major Political Parties in the UK had a Party Manifesto for the 2017 GE of leaving the EU.

 

Between them they received 82% of the vote. The Lib Dems who ran on a platform of staying in the EU were almost wiped out.

 

So who is it that is '' Soft up there '' ? It would appear that would cover remainers who still cannot accept:

 

1. The Referendum result.

2. The parliamentary vote on triggering Article 50.

3. The result of the 2017 GE.

 

You can now add in

 

4. Royal Assent being given to the EU withdrawal Bill.

 

The 2017 GE was hardly a ringing endorsement for the government or for Brexit. If the magic money tree hadn't suddenly appeared, we might be in a very different situation today.

 

As for the royal assent being further validation, that is like taking credit for the sun rising in the morning - it is inconceivable that it would not happen.

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

Only remainers could not see, were unwilling to admit, or were just too blind to see that EU Laws took precedence over UK Law.

What is UK Law?

[The Renegade]

2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

The 2017 GE was hardly a ringing endorsement for the government or for Brexit.

So what would you call the 2 parties, who's manifesto's were for leaving the EU getting 82% of the vote and the Party campaigning to remain in the EU being obliterated ?

 

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

As for the royal assent being further validation, that is like taking credit for the sun rising in the morning - it is inconceivable that it would not happen.

I do not believe I said anything of the sort.

 

I believe I said that it was a further step in the process of leaving the EU and remainers still cannot accept it.

 

Nice try, but an F for Fail.

[transam]

6 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

What is UK Law?

Start another thread if you don't know....

[Laughing Gravy]

46 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

For sure some of the forum uber hard brexiteers who might be a little bit soft up there failing to work out the differencies which are splitting both major political parties on a daily basis.

The parties are split because they are not carrying out the referendum result. It is that simple. If it was carried out as the people were promised then we wouldn't have the split. Maybe people would be voting for another government but as they had the chance to get the conservatives out a year ago, I doubt it. Labour cant make its mind up and changes its stance every month. The split is down to the referendum not being carried out and the MP's looking after their own self interests IMHO. 

[The Renegade]

7 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

What is UK Law?

It was right there in my comment

 

Quote

The EU Withdrawal Act, as it is now known, will also repeal the 1972 European Communities Act, which took Britain into the EU and meant that European law took precedence over laws passed in the UK Parliament.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44615245

 

If you do not understand the paragraph. Then contact the BBC and ask them to explain it to you. I thought it was very self explanatory. Obviously some have issues understanding it.

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

So what would you call the 2 parties, who's manifesto's were for leaving the EU getting 82% of the vote and the Party campaigning to remain in the EU being obliterated ?

 

I do not believe I said anything of the sort.

 

I believe I said that it was a further step in the process of leaving the EU and remainers still cannot accept it.

 

Nice try, but an F for Fail.

You made a list of issues which you suggested Remainers cannot accept, to which you added royal assent. In reality, while some may see it as a milestone, it has no more significance in the steps towards Brexit than David Davis putting on a fresh pair of socks in the morning. It adds no weight to your point.

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

You made a list of issues which you suggested Remainers cannot accept, to which you added royal assent. In reality, while some may see it as a milestone, it has no more significance in the steps towards Brexit than David Davis putting on a fresh pair of socks in the morning. It adds no weight to your point.

It is OK.

 

You do not understand this paragraph from the BBC either.

 

Quote

The EU Withdrawal Act, as it is now known, will also repeal the 1972 European Communities Act, which took Britain into the EU and meant that European law took precedence over laws passed in the UK Parliament.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44615245

 

Explains everything.

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

It was right there in my comment

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44615245

 

If you do not understand the paragraph. Then contact the BBC and ask them to explain it to you. I thought it was very self explanatory. Obviously some have issues understanding it.

I was just thinking that, for one who is so quick to point out the minor errors in the posts of others, for you to talk about the EU superseding something that doesn't exist seemed somewhat lax (your use of capital letters does suggest that you think it is a proper noun).

[dick dasterdly]

4 hours ago, tebee said:

Interesting  - The FT think  when it comes to Brexit and business, facts will trump ideology and  and  Theresa May’s paying a long game for a softer Brexit.

 

https://www.ft.com/video/a5504338-cd1f-4086-802b-90e89862fbfd?playlist-name=section-82645c31-4426-4ef5-99c9-9df6e0940c00

 

 

 

 

Couldn't read the article, but I've been saying for a long time that politicians and big business are playing "a long game for a softer Brexit."

 

Nothing to do with "facts" (as these are unknown) - but purely because it's in their interest.

[Kieran00001]

40 minutes ago, nauseus said:

If, in your flashbacks, you consider that these cyclical arguments were won by remainers, then maybe we should hit that road again. No, nothing much has changed, except that the non-negotiations seem to be becoming ever more useless. 

 

The basic question remains the same: do you prefer to remain British, with a vote for a national government every 5 years, or do you want to abandon that identity to become an obscure part of a European superstate, where the elected parliament has little real effect, with the real power in the hands of a few selected EU Commissioners.

 

No, nothing new. Economic problems will emerge as a result of Brexit but that is the only argument that Project Fear and the remainers have ever had. Personally I see Britain being better-off in the long run as a non-member. Remainers seem to be too short-sighted to see any probable long-term damage to Britain and the European continent as a whole, especially with the EU structured as it is and as mismanaged as it is has been. 

 

I am in favour of a sensible association of European nations but not in its present form. 

 

Quote

a European superstate, where the elected parliament has little real effect, with the real power in the hands of a few selected EU Commissioners.

 

You really should at least learn about how the process works instead of just blindly repeating the lies of the crooks who sold you Brexit.  The Commissioners can only work on what has been proposed by parliament, of course parliament has effect, without them there would be nothing in the hands of the commission.

 

And no, the basic question has changed, now it is do you want to help a bunch of crooked bankers get away with the heist of the century or do you want justice?

[The Renegade]

27 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Nothing to do with "facts" (as these are unknown) - but purely because it's in their interest.

Exactly.

 

I am still trying to work out how things that have not happened ( yet ) can be labelled '' Facts ''

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, tebee said:

So now we have two cults in the UK? So now we have Brexit to than for a religious schism that will take a generation or more to heal.

 

This is why I have so much vitriol about the  government's decision to take to popularist stand and go for a hard right Brexit after a nearly evenly split vote. It was taken to try to heal rifts in the Conservative party over any consideration for the good of the county. The nation now is split - at least half of it is going to be unhappy and will cause trouble for years to come, probably destroying the political system as we know it. 

 

I really can't see much good coming of this debacle even if we choose to remain  in the end. 

 

BTW in spite of my youthful good looks, I'm somewhat over  50, so not a product of any dumbed down education system.  

Except, as I keep pointing out, if the vote had been to remain, I'm pretty sure that the brexiteers would have accepted it.

 

Yes, UKIP would still be in existence and perhaps more of the electorate would have turned to them at the next election.  But I've no doubt that they wouldn't have done everything possible to fight the referendum result.  I say this as we now know that the majority voted to leave, but they'd caused no trouble previously - other than voting UKIP.

 

In short, it's the remainers that have caused this schism, by refusing to accept the referendum result.

[The Renegade]

4 hours ago, tebee said:

No one has yet been able to give me a reason that will stand up to scrutiny as to why it is a good idea,

Well, let me turn that around and give you this. 

 

It is copied and pasted and I take no credit for it. But it pretty much nails it.

 

Quote

 I have yet to meet a Remainer who can give me valid reasons as to why I should not have voted Leave.

 

All I get is condescension, sneering, snide, patronising remarks and the usual mantras:

 

"You don't know what you were voting for'

'You are jeopardising the future for young people'

'All businesses will leave the UK'

 

'You are 

 

a) a racist

b) geriatric

c) gammon (love that one!)

d) xenophobic

e) little Englander

f) wanting to relive the imperial days

g) voting to be poorer

Sound familiar ?

[tebee]

1 minute ago, The Renegade said:

Well, let me turn that around and give you this. 

 

It is copied and pasted and I take no credit for it. But it pretty much nails it.

 

Sound familiar ?

Because in this day and age it's economic suicide ....

[dick dasterdly]

"a European superstate, where the elected parliament has little real effect, with the real power in the hands of a few selected EU Commissioners."

 

41 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

 

You really should at least learn about how the process works instead of just blindly repeating the lies of the crooks who sold you Brexit.  The Commissioners can only work on what has been proposed by parliament, of course parliament has effect, without them there would be nothing in the hands of the commission.

 

And no, the basic question has changed, now it is do you want to help a bunch of crooked bankers get away with the heist of the century or do you want justice?

Re. the first para. you should watch the documentary by Jeremy Paxman on the subject.  He was in no doubt that the eu commission was in charge.

 

Re. the second para.,  I agree - except I think the crooked bankers (not to mention politicians and big business) are on the remain side....

[The Renegade]

6 minutes ago, tebee said:

Because in this day and age it's economic suicide ....

Is it ?

 

When will we know if it is economic suicide ?

 

5 years ? 10 years ? 20 years ?

 

We certainly will not know today, or in the near term whether it will be economic suicide.

 

You saying it does not make it true.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

10 minutes ago, tebee said:

Because in this day and age it's economic suicide ....

 

Not sure if Greece, Portugal, Italy and Spain would agree with you, they probably think that remaining in the Union is the economic suicide 

[tebee]

8 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Is it ?

 

When will we know if it is economic suicide ?

 

5 years ? 10 years ? 20 years ?

 

We certainly will not know today, or in the near term whether it will be economic suicide.

 

You saying it does not make it true.

With the dishonorable exception of professor Minford, just about every economist says it will be just that - but then they're experts, who wants to listen to them.

At the current state of UK berexit preparedness I'd expect us to find out it's true about a week after we leave.

 

[The Renegade]

1 minute ago, tebee said:

Profeser Millford,

Who dat ?

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, tebee said:

With the dishonorable exception of Profeser Millford, just about every economist say it will be just that - but then they're experts, who wants to listen to them.

At the current state of UK berexit preparedness I'd expect us to find out it's true about a week after we leave.

 

We've had this discussion a hundred times, and I'm sure that most of us can't be bothered to repeat time and time again how the 'experts' have been proven wrong time and time again....

[Eloquent pilgrim]

10 minutes ago, tebee said:

With the dishonorable exception of profeser Millford, just about every economist says it will be just that - but then they're experts, who wants to listen to them.

At the current state of UK berexit preparedness I'd expect us to find out it's true about a week after we leave.

 

The modern expert appears to be someone that is paid huge sums of money to cast an opinion and make a prediction. They are then paid more huge sums of money to explain the underlying factors and trends that caused their prediction to be completely wrong ….. nice work if you can get it

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Eloquent pilgrim said:

The modern expert appears to be someone that is paid huge sums of money to cast an opinion and make a prediction. They are then paid more huge sums of money to explain the underlying factors and trends that caused their prediction to be completely wrong ….. nice work if you can get it

As long as their opinion/prediction supports the cause of the employer's preferred response....

[Kieran00001]

12 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

"a European superstate, where the elected parliament has little real effect, with the real power in the hands of a few selected EU Commissioners."

 

Re. the first para. you should watch the documentary by Jeremy Paxman on the subject.  He was in no doubt that the eu commission was in charge.

 

Re. the second para.,  I agree - except I think the crooked bankers (not to mention politicians and big business) are on the remain side....

 

The EU parliament have the right to dismiss the commission by vote of no confidence, have to give their approval to all legislature coming from the commission and any MEP can request the commission to justify their work at any moment, the commission is commissioned by parliament, the commission are not in control, parliament is,

 

And I am sure you think that the Brexit vote was a vote against the crooked regime, and if only it was, but unfortunately the reality is the EU was the only thing keeping them in check, hence why there were brokers and bankers bankrolling Leave, they were not seeking to free you of their crookedness, they were seeking to free themselves of the regulations of the EU.

 

I suggest you follow the money, someone made 200 million from short selling during the referendum, and that someone also bankrolled the Leave campaign, if that was not a crooked banker then what is?  At some point the Leave brigade are going to have to face the reality that they have been had, that they have been the helpful idiots of a bunch of crooks and that they have just helped them sell our people down the river.

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

The modern expert appears to be someone that is paid huge sums of money to cast an opinion and make a prediction. They are then paid more huge sums of money to explain the underlying factors and trends that caused their prediction to be completely wrong ….. nice work if you can get it

If we were talking one or two people willing to whore out their reputations for cash, then that may be plausible, but to suggest that the overwhelming majority of people who are considered experts in their field are shilling for, well, a shilling seems a bit naive. 

 

I don't know any reknowned economists personally, but I suspect that, in the main, their egos are no less fragile than the rest of us; would they all be willing to potentially be proven wrong simply for short term gain?

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

The EU parliament have the right to dismiss the commission by vote of no confidence, have to give their approval to all legislature coming from the commission and any MEP can request the commission to justify their work at any moment, the commission is commissioned by parliament, the commission are not in control, parliament is,

 

And I am sure you think that the Brexit vote was a vote against the crooked regime, and if only it was, but unfortunately the reality is the EU was the only thing keeping them in check, hence why there were brokers and bankers bankrolling Leave, they were not seeking to free you of their crookedness, they were seeking to free themselves of the regulations of the EU.

 

I suggest you follow the money, someone made 200 million from short selling during the referendum, and that someone also bankrolled the Leave campaign, if that was not a crooked banker then what is?  At some point the Leave brigade are going to have to face the reality that they have been had, that they have been the helpful idiots of a bunch of crooks and that they have just helped them sell our people down the river.

Also, don't forget that the Brexit bankrollers are continuing to align themselves to best bleed dry the UK public post Brexit: Rees Mogg trying to get tariffs and workers' rights scrapped, for example.

[tebee]

18 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Who dat ?

lesdixia strikes againg  - have corrected it !

 

[Kieran00001]

21 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

Not sure if Greece, Portugal, Italy and Spain would agree with you, they probably think that remaining in the Union is the economic suicide 

 

Only the completely ignorant folk from those countries, the educated folk know that leaving would mean a banking collapse and decades of poverty.

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, RuamRudy said:

If we were talking one or two people willing to whore out their reputations for cash, then that may be plausible, but to suggest that the overwhelming majority of people who are considered experts in their field are shilling for, well, a shilling seems a bit naive. 

 

I don't know any reknowned economists personally, but I suspect that, in the main, their egos are no less fragile than the rest of us; would they all be willing to potentially be proven wrong simply for short term gain?

Most of those 'experts' were employees of financial institutions/media and the like.

 

They were hardly likely to lose their job or reputation as a result of supporting their employers' cause!

[The Renegade]

Just now, dick dasterdly said:

Most of those 'experts' were employees of financial institutions/media and the like.

 

They were hardly likely to lose their job or reputation as a result of supporting their employers' cause!

Correct

 

29 Feb 2016

 

Quote

Brexit would drive pound down to parity with euro, warns UBS - as it happened

https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2016/feb/29/eurozone-doomed-mervyn-king-markets-fall-g20-live