5 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

Sandy, you seem to be one of the few that's taking more than a passing interest in the Irish border "issue". 

 

According to The Spectator, the Attorney General Geoffrey Cox told ministers on Tuesday this week that the UK has a choice to accept a backstop it cannot get out of, push for no deal or renounce the backstop entirely.

Nothing new there, telling ministers they have to make a choice, invariably leads to the can being kicked down the road.

 

There is a problem with the border in Ireland, the EU know it, the republic knows it and NI knows it, the ones with their head in the sand is the UK government. They were warned repeatedly at the time of the referendum about the risks to the Belfast Agreement and the Peace Process funding but it was like water off a ducks back.

The problem has been created by brexit so it is up to the creator of brexit to find a solution that will satisfy all parties concerned. Of course that would mean there has to be a desire to find a solution.

 

I have a friend that lives in Belfast, been to his house and seen that 20 ft fence that runs across the city, along with many other reminders of the troubles. He is here in Pattaya at the moment and tells me that they are all sick to death of brexit and the UK government, about 18 months now since Stormont last met. They are quietly hoping that someone will start the ball rolling on reunification.

5 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

 

Stop possible second referendum on E.U. membership

There is a growing band of people that want to reverse the result of the democratic vote of this country to leave the European Union and are calling for a second referendum. This is mainly by the people that lost the vote two years ago and cannot accept the democratic vote of the majority decision.

 

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/226071

 

The referendum would be on the deal!

 

Stop possible second referendum on E.U. membership

There is a growing band of people that want to reverse the result of the democratic vote of this country to leave the European Union and are calling for a second referendum. This is mainly by the people that lost the vote two years ago and cannot accept the democratic vote of the majority decision.

 

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/226071

 

You are actually calling for a debate in Parliament about their being a second referendum - has this been thought through?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

1 minute ago, Orac said:

 

 

You are actually calling for a debate in Parliament about their being a second referendum - has this been thought through?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

I see no issue If I was a remoaner I would be worried and I would want this petition stopped or to fail

1 hour ago, SheungWan said:

Hard Brexiteer business understanding:

 

Pure gold! This is the way to react and talk about brexit. That's also one of the things EU will miss after brexit. Good ole English humour. 

5 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

 

You should be a professional satirist with comments like that! Or should I say... comedian? ???? 

It was a good writing, no?

 

I see no issue If I was a remoaner I would be worried and I would want this petition stopped or to fail

Can’t see why - since a “people’s vote” would require an Act of Parliament surely they would be quite keen on getting this debated.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

1 minute ago, Orac said:

 

Can’t see why - since a “people’s vote” would require an Act of Parliament surely they would be quite keen on getting this debated.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

If thats the case then all the remoaners will sign it as well

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

I used to work in a brit. company with many subsidiaries in other companies - and they had no problem bringing in a few well-paid/anticipated 'high flyer' employees (from non-eu country subsidiaries) to provide them with experience in GHO.

 

You're trying to turn a 'non' problem' into a 'problem' - when it comes to well-paid, intelligent people - who have mostly always been able to easily obtain employment visas when they are offered jobs in the uk, or elsewhere.

 

The problem has always centred around non-skilled workers paid the minimum wage (at best) - which has badly affected the poorest paid brit. workers, and 'trickled up' the chain.  Which has proven to be far more effective than the 'trickle down' theory!

My reply was to the claim there is no need for foreign scientists to come to UK after brexit. That's really, really wrong way to think of the future development. 

 

Yes, it's obvious that the people with PhD's and salaries over 30.000 pounds are allowed to come to England to work in their fields. The question is more of, who want anymore to come there? How is the funding of basic research secured? How complicated the process is for multinational deals? Hint, most of the current scientific studies are done in multinational teams. Also hint, EU has become a major player in the field of sciences.

 

There is a lot of facts i this video. I can't bother to search the good parts for you, as I don't think brexiteers would bother to watch the video as it doesn't proclaim the thought they are supporting. The people who believe in sciences instead of dogmas, however like to see both sides of the conversations. Hint 3, as a scientist talks, there is also talk about the possibilities brexit brings. Perhaps you would like to watch it for that reason?

 

Btw. Did the other guy got really drunk at the end of the video? He certainly sounded like one ????

 

 

24 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

The referendum would be on the deal!

That would be OK but that's not what a lot of people are trying to achieve with this.

If thats the case then all the remoaners will sign it as well

Can’t see it making a lot of difference along with the 200k petition to rescind Art.50 if Vote Leave broke Electoral Law, 145k asking for a referendum on the final deal, 141k to leave EU immediately or 113k to ensure a leave option is included in a parliamentary vote.

Get the feeling these petitions don’t really have much effect.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

2 hours ago, CanterbrigianBangkoker said:

 

Ta very much. I like to paint a picture!

 

I don't imagine for a moment that everyone who voted leave knew what would come (in the form of the political hokum, point-scoring and backbiting that Brexit precipitated) but that doesn't mean conversely that remain voters were any more well informed either. People who did understand enough about both the EU/EEA and it's effects on the UK's and European economies/sovereignty and legislative ability etc. voted out knowing full well it wouldn't be an easy gig, as again it was unprecedented.

 

There are many senior economists that are of different schools of thought on Brexit. For me, P.Minford makes the best and most objective case. He's a smart fella. Much of the punditry seems to be more pro-establishment horse**** IMHO, and I would discount many bodies such as the IMF and ECB or even the BoE as I would regard them as parties with 'vested interest' in remaining. Plus, we all know that forecasts made by supposed 'experts' or 'specialised agencies' have a pretty dire track record in recent years, in terms of veracity of predictions - they are simply that, predictions. Successful and united UK post Brexit will rely on many factors, not all economic either.

 

So regarding the promised 'Milk and Honey', same response, it is waaaaaaay too soon to know, I mean - c'mon, we've not even Brexited yet!

So, besides self-fulfilling prophecies that may come about from certain swathes of the population refusing to grow up and adapt, we must suspend judgement on the future of the UK, it will be what we are able to make of it in no small way.

 

Nay-saying won't help, it'll only hinder, and to make grandiose declarations (not accusing you here particularly BTW) about outcomes of Brexit that have yet to happen is just stupid and is evidence of certain people's hope to see Brexit Britain fail, if you ask me.  

 

BUT, I don't want to see Brexit happen at any cost either, specifically the break up of OUR venerable union. That would be a very sad thing to witness. Again, I don't think it will happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you agree that there is no clear, obvious and major benefit? No pot of gold in return for the risk?

 

Do you understand that the size of the risk and the size of the benefit are closely linked?

 

I don't wish to take such a huge risk for such a tenuous benefit. There's a whole sub branch of psychology which deals with exactly this issue.

 

The issue is exacerbated because there are guaranteed losses (rebates and opt outs for example) but no guaranteed gains.

 

Brexit is an idiotic idea.

30 minutes ago, Grouse said:

So you agree that there is no clear, obvious and major benefit? No pot of gold in return for the risk?

 

Do you understand that the size of the risk and the size of the benefit are closely linked?

 

I don't wish to take such a huge risk for such a tenuous benefit. There's a whole sub branch of psychology which deals with exactly this issue.

 

The issue is exacerbated because there are guaranteed losses (rebates and opt outs for example) but no guaranteed gains.

 

Brexit is an idiotic idea.

Some people get an endorphin buzz from taking a risk - extreme mountain bikers for example. Good luck to them!

 

Some people like pontoon. Twist?

 

How about Russian roulette

 

No, I want to see a huge benefit for significant risk. Or at least a small benefit for a small risk

 

This is not worth it 

This is jjust the beginning.....we have another 680 to go........

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britain-faces-talks-with-20-nations-after-trade-protest-ml8dt92pf?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&fbclid=IwAR3ZDSApT_1aJq5e-Yy9zKEWo9NcV-MsCczf7QSUeW2SCBT3WgrAiuQ12Q0#Echobox=1540535472

 

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

My reply was to the claim there is no need for foreign scientists to come to UK after brexit. That's really, really wrong way to think of the future development. 

 

Yes, it's obvious that the people with PhD's and salaries over 30.000 pounds are allowed to come to England to work in their fields. The question is more of, who want anymore to come there? How is the funding of basic research secured? How complicated the process is for multinational deals? Hint, most of the current scientific studies are done in multinational teams. Also hint, EU has become a major player in the field of sciences.

 

There is a lot of facts i this video. I can't bother to search the good parts for you, as I don't think brexiteers would bother to watch the video as it doesn't proclaim the thought they are supporting. The people who believe in sciences instead of dogmas, however like to see both sides of the conversations. Hint 3, as a scientist talks, there is also talk about the possibilities brexit brings. Perhaps you would like to watch it for that reason?

 

Btw. Did the other guy got really drunk at the end of the video? He certainly sounded like one ????

 

 

30,000 bless

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Some people get an endorphin buzz from taking a risk - extreme mountain bikers for example. Good luck to them!

 

Some people like pontoon. Twist?

 

How about Russian roulette

 

No, I want to see a huge benefit for significant risk. Or at least a small benefit for a small risk

 

This is not worth it 

Brexit is like Russian roulette, except their are no empty chambers........... best aimed at the foot, then

7 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Brexit is like Russian roulette, except their are no empty chambers........... best aimed at the foot, then

 

????...or at a Remoaner!

 

 

I could start a list...........

5 hours ago, mommysboy said:

How has the democracy inherent in the Brexit vote served Scotland and Northern Ireland? Anyone can see the format was unsuitable. At best it should have been a super majority, and a block vote. Why continue with something which is inherently poor?  For the sake of some abstract notion of democracy... no way.  We need to get real- sometimes the effect before our eyes says all.

But wasn't the Scottish referendum simply to stay within the UK or to become independent? Exactly the same as the Brexit referendum. And of course the SNP who called the vote and lost now want another one to reverse that democratic decision. If they win this time then those who voted remain have the right to call for another referendum ad infinitum.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

 

A referendum on Scottish independence from the United Kingdom took place on Thursday 18 September 2014.[1] The referendum question, which voters answered with "Yes" or "No", was "Should Scotland be an independent country?"[2] The "No" side won, with 2,001,926 (55.3%) voting against independence and 1,617,989 (44.7%) voting in favour. The turnout of 84.6% was the highest recorded for an election or referendum in the United Kingdom since the introduction of universal suffrage

6 hours ago, tebee said:

Norway offers way out of the Brexit maze

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/08374ad8-d899-11e8-9c20-5eb2e7b96a26

 

well, as an outsider I find it interesting to follow the Brexit developments,

don't have much personal interest in the outcome though

 

one point though, I do hope I will never see UK back in EFTA

 

(and, I am actually pretty sure that a EFTA/EEA membership would frustrate UK no end)

9 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

The Scots were told that the only way to secure EU membership was to stay in the UK; to leave the UK was a guaranteed means of leaving the EU and, possibly, not being allowed to return. 

who told you this fairy tale?

 

1 minute ago, melvinmelvin said:

who told you this fairy tale?

 

It might be nice if he included a link or reference of some kind.

12 hours ago, mommysboy said:

You know the incredible mess Brexit has caused.  This is something that will go on for years and decades.  Scottish devolution is a similar situation. To blithely say it would be done swiftly and talk about it in such vague terms shows you have learned nothing from even recent history. 

 

To even talk about what Scotland wants ignores the fact that about half wouldn't want it, and, as pertinently, large regions within Scotland were staunchly pro-UK to the extent that they were prepared to remain part of the UK and not Scotland.

 

 

 

if you desire to be perceived of being somewhere in the vicinity of seriousness I suggest you quite simply refrain from

commenting on what  I might /  might not have learned,

you are not qualified to comment on that as you know f*all  about it

 

I  am not sure what you are talking about, Scotland leaving UK or joining EU - or both - or smth else

 

my point was;

assuming the UK  will Brexit in March

if Scotland should opt to leave the UK after that, or before for that matter - doesn't really matter

I am fairly confident Scotland would be able to join EU  reasonably swift if that were her wish

 

would have consequences of course,

euro up north

schengen up north

hard borders here and there

 

the waffle from Spain I don't take seriously at all

EU refusing Scotland membership would be a nail size gigantic in EUs coffin

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, billd766 said:

But wasn't the Scottish referendum simply to stay within the UK or to become independent? Exactly the same as the Brexit referendum. And of course the SNP who called the vote and lost now want another one to reverse that democratic decision. If they win this time then those who voted remain have the right to call for another referendum ad infinitum.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014

 

A referendum on Scottish independence from the United Kingdom took place on Thursday 18 September 2014.[1] The referendum question, which voters answered with "Yes" or "No", was "Should Scotland be an independent country?"[2] The "No" side won, with 2,001,926 (55.3%) voting against independence and 1,617,989 (44.7%) voting in favour. The turnout of 84.6% was the highest recorded for an election or referendum in the United Kingdom since the introduction of universal suffrage

I think the point I was making was that some people have learned little from the Brexit folly.  If there were to be a future referendum on Scotland the format could never be the same again to avoid the type of mess we have with Brexit ,eg, a 60% majority and a core number of regions agreeing.  You have to learn from mistakes.  

 

It's a pity, in my opinion, that this can't be retrospectively added to the Brexit vote????

 

The other thing is that the Scottish referendum produced a decisive result.  Both referenda were billed as once and for all, which in political terms usually means once every 30 years or so.

 

I really hope we don't have anymore- not ever again- unless it's on tea vs coffee.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

I think the point I was making was that some people have learned little from the Brexit folly.  If there were to be a future referendum on Scotland the format could never be the same again to avoid the type of mess we have with Brexit ,eg, a 60% majority and a core number of regions agreeing.  You have to learn from mistakes.  

 

It's a pity, in my opinion, that this can't be retrospectively added to the Brexit vote????

 

The other thing is that the Scottish referendum produced a decisive result.  Both referenda were billed as once and for all, which in political terms usually means once every 30 years or so.

 

I really hope we don't have anymore- not ever again- unless it's on tea vs coffee.

 

 

 

But the Brexit referendum was 2 years later than the Scottish one and followed the same format.

 

Now if we assume that the next referendum requires a super majority (put your own figures here) what happens if neither side reach that super majority?

 

Does it fall back on the previous referendum or do they vote again and again until one side wins?

 

If the Remain (Brexit side) wins does that mean that the leave side can have another referendum as the score would be 1 all?

 

The same rules would have to apply for a Scottish referendum including age limits and ALL voters born in Scotland and not just living there.

9 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

if you desire to be perceived of being somewhere in the vicinity of seriousness I suggest you quite simply refrain from

commenting on what  I might /  might not have learned,

you are not qualified to comment on that as you know f*all  about it

 

I  am not sure what you are talking about, Scotland leaving UK or joining EU - or both - or smth else

 

my point was;

assuming the UK  will Brexit in March

if Scotland should opt to leave the UK after that, or before for that matter - doesn't really matter

I am fairly confident Scotland would be able to join EU  reasonably swift if that were her wish

 

would have consequences of course,

euro up north

schengen up north

hard borders here and there

 

the waffle from Spain I don't take seriously at all

EU refusing Scotland membership would be a nail size gigantic in EUs coffin

 

 

 

Ignoring the insulting rant, I am saying that from Brexit we have learned that there is nothing swift about leaving the EU, there will be nothing quick about Scorttish devolution, and nothing swift about joining the EU. 

 

 

10 minutes ago, billd766 said:

But the Brexit referendum was 2 years later than the Scottish one and followed the same format.

 

Now if we assume that the next referendum requires a super majority (put your own figures here) what happens if neither side reach that super majority?

 

Does it fall back on the previous referendum or do they vote again and again until one side wins?

 

If the Remain (Brexit side) wins does that mean that the leave side can have another referendum as the score would be 1 all?

 

The same rules would have to apply for a Scottish referendum including age limits and ALL voters born in Scotland and not just living there.

I'm not sure of the confusion here, but can help with the super-majority issue. The super majority is designed with idea that a decision can only be taken if a significant majority is reached. It could be 55%, or more likely 60%.  This means that if 59% of Scotland voted to leave then that is not enough to win the referendum, and the status quo continues- Scotland would continue to be part of the UK.

 

The idea of a super majority is to avoid the very mess we have with Brexit: a nation divided by a narrow and controversial result.

 

The super-majority does favour the status quo. The only deciding factor is whether the opposing party (Scottish leavers) can reach reach the magic 60%.  If they can't the current situation prevails.

 

 

44 minutes ago, billd766 said:

It might be nice if he included a link or reference of some kind.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-eu-independence-referendum-scotland-join-queue-membership-apply-a7627201.html

 

Of course the people should decide.

Why should it be any different?

9 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

The Scots were told that the only way to secure EU membership was to stay in the UK; to leave the UK was a guaranteed means of leaving the EU and, possibly, not being allowed to return. 

I do remember it being a key part of the debate.

 

From memory: the SNP manifesto stated (unilaterally) that it intended to remain a part of the EU.  It was explained this was just not possible, that the only way to remain part of the EU was to stay in the UK, since devolution would require Scotland to drop out not only from the UK, but also from the EU, because the UK is the EU member state.

 

Nobody remotely thought at the time that Brexit would be happening.

 

Ultimately, the Independence vote was about Scotland deciding about the UK, not the EU.  And it was a decision to stay with the UK once and for all at that.  

 

 

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

So you agree that there is no clear, obvious and major benefit? No pot of gold in return for the risk?

 

Do you understand that the size of the risk and the size of the benefit are closely linked?

 

I don't wish to take such a huge risk for such a tenuous benefit. There's a whole sub branch of psychology which deals with exactly this issue.

 

The issue is exacerbated because there are guaranteed losses (rebates and opt outs for example) but no guaranteed gains.

 

Brexit is an idiotic idea.

It is. 

 

At best, it's a gamble to retain what we have already got using time, money and effort, and at worst significant harm could be incurred.

 

From a business viewpoint, you'd be laughed out of any boardroom.

 

Nuts!