1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

That was the statement I was responding to.  The following post by you was much clearer, thank you.

 

Let's look at the scenario after the referendum.  The chief spokesperson for Brexit and main flag waver was Johnson.  He immediately ran for cover and didn't stand, nor did Gove or any other of the Brexiteer team.  Angela Leadsom did throw her hat in the ring but was always a non starter.  May was cajoled into standing with the backing of Johnson, Gove and the other Brexit voices.  May had been a remainer but still they pushed her towards the poisoned chalice.

 

She grasped the chalice and as well as bringing Johnson aboard in a key cabinet position, she went on to put other prolific Brexiteers in prime negotiating positions. Liam Fox and David Davis being the main choices.  She followed this by making bizarre declarations and indicated going for a hard Brexit.  "No deal is better than a bad deal" and the insane  "Brexit means Brexit".

 

How do you see this as trying to scupper Brexit?  What more could she have done to beat the Brexit drum?  As time has gone by it has become more and more obvious that a successful Brexit cannot be delivered.  Evident by the mess that we are in today and the fact that May is holding a three hour emergency Cabinet meeting to discuss how to prepare for a possible no deal Brexit.

 

I know you feel that it is the remain side that have damaged the negotiations but it isn't the remain side running them.  May even replaced Davis with another hard Brexiteer Raab rather than going for a remain leaning option.  If she is trying to scupper Brexit then she is making hard work of it and committing political suicide at the same time.

 

Lastly, the MP's are there to do the right thing for their constituents but we all know they are really more interested in self preservation.  You cannot expect them to back a route that is as badly flawed as Brexit.

May is trying to scupper it - or at least arrange a deal that is Brexit in name only - she always has been. She has never really tried to push through her stated aims from Lancaster House. A couple of token leavers in the "team" is just a political and cosmetic cover. Davis had had enough a long time ago and after Ollie's antics and the Chequers plan were revealed he finally quit. The present cabinet is far too biased towards remain for there not to be a shambles if this lot are actually intending to go through with Brexit.   

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

May is trying to scupper it - or at least arrange a deal that is Brexit in name only - she always has been. She has never really tried to push through her stated aims from Lancaster House. A couple of token leavers in the "team" is just a political and cosmetic cover. Davis had had enough a long time ago and after Ollie's antics and the Chequers plan were revealed he finally quit. The present cabinet is far too biased towards remain for there not to be a shambles if this lot are actually intending to go through with Brexit.   

So why have the hard Brexiters been so reluctant to challenge May? Poisoned chalice, anyone?

What do you mean by "Parliament trying to do it?" What exactly could Parliament do that it's not doing now? 

What could it do that it's not doing now? LOL Well it could start by doing SOMETHING.

SOMETHING i mean other than putting obstacles in the way and continually putting off getting on with things in the hope that everyone ends up either forgetting about Brexit or becoming so exasperated that they give up.

SOMETHING like work on ideas for how to maximise the opportunities that will come with Brexit. SOMETHING like figuring out solutions to problems like the border in N Ireland, rather than just bleating on about what a problem it is.

There are so many constructive things they COULD be doing. All they are doing is negative unproductive things like infighting.

Remainers love it of course and quietly cheer it on as it means Brexit gets delayed another day, and they get to say, "see, we told you so".

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

14 minutes ago, rixalex said:

What could it do that it's not doing now? LOL Well it could start by doing SOMETHING.

SOMETHING i mean other than putting obstacles in the way and continually putting off getting on with things in the hope that everyone ends up either forgetting about Brexit or becoming so exasperated that they give up.

SOMETHING like work on ideas for how to maximise the opportunities that will come with Brexit. SOMETHING like figuring out solutions to problems like the border in N Ireland, rather than just bleating on about what a problem it is.

There are so many constructive things they COULD be doing. All they are doing is negative unproductive things like infighting.

Remainers love it of course and quietly cheer it on as it means Brexit gets delayed another day, and they get to say, "see, we told you so".

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Parliament is putting obstacles in the way of what? Conservatives can't even agree what Brexit means? Is it Teresa May's idea of Brexit? Boris Johnson's?

And how is it Parliament's job to figure out how to maximize opportunities, or as is more likely the case, minimize damages? Surely the business community will have a better handle on that.

As for figuring out the solution to the Norther Ireland border problem. It's not rocket science. It's not that the problem is difficult to understand. The problem is that it's simple to understand. But if you live in denial about it as Brexiters do, then you're going to keep on coming up with "solutions" that won't satisfy the clearly stated requirement of the EU.

There really isn't a lot that Parliament could be doing. It's a legislative body, not an executive one.

The real problem is that Brexiters expect to have their cake and eat it, too.

What they want is irreconcilable with the realities of the situation. 

 

Parliament is putting obstacles in the way of what? Conservatives can't even agree what Brexit means? Is it Teresa May's idea of Brexit? Boris Johnson's?
And how is it Parliament's job to figure out how to maximize opportunities, or as is more likely the case, minimize damages? Surely the business community will have a better handle on that.
As for figuring out the solution to the Norther Ireland border problem. It's not rocket science. It's not that the problem is difficult to understand. The problem is that it's simple to understand. But if you live in denial about it as Brexiters do, then you're going to keep on coming up with "solutions" that won't satisfy the clearly stated requirement of the EU.
There really isn't a lot that Parliament could be doing. It's a legislative body, not an executive one.
The real problem is that Brexiters expect to have their cake and eat it, too.
What they want is irreconcilable with the realities of the situation. 
 

First you question what obstacles parliament is putting in the way, and then you state Conservatives can't even agree what Brexit means. Contradicting yourself. That's an obstacle right there.

What Brexit meant was very clearly stated prior to the referendum. Getting out of the EU, taking back control of borders, taking back sovereignty etc etc. We all know what the stated aims were of leaving, even if remainers pretend to now forget.

It was only after the referendum that the leavers started with this nonsense about soft Brexit, hard Brexit, in the customs union Brexit, out of the customs union Brexit, nonsense. Trying to cloud the issue, confuse things and argue the toss over every single step.

What is the cake we want to have and eat?

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

30 minutes ago, rixalex said:

First you question what obstacles parliament is putting in the way, and then you state Conservatives can't even agree what Brexit means. Contradicting yourself. That's an obstacle right there.

What Brexit meant was very clearly stated prior to the referendum. Getting out of the EU, taking back control of borders, taking back sovereignty etc etc. We all know what the stated aims were of leaving, even if remainers pretend to now forget.

It was only after the referendum that the leavers started with this nonsense about soft Brexit, hard Brexit, in the customs union Brexit, out of the customs union Brexit, nonsense. Trying to cloud the issue, confuse things and argue the toss over every single step.

What is the cake we want to have and eat?

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

You have a very selective memory.

1 hour ago, rixalex said:

First you question what obstacles parliament is putting in the way, and then you state Conservatives can't even agree what Brexit means. Contradicting yourself. That's an obstacle right there.

What Brexit meant was very clearly stated prior to the referendum. Getting out of the EU, taking back control of borders, taking back sovereignty etc etc. We all know what the stated aims were of leaving, even if remainers pretend to now forget.

It was only after the referendum that the leavers started with this nonsense about soft Brexit, hard Brexit, in the customs union Brexit, out of the customs union Brexit, nonsense. Trying to cloud the issue, confuse things and argue the toss over every single step.

What is the cake we want to have and eat?

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

So it's really not about why can't Parliament come to an agreement about Brexit. It's about why can't Parliament agree with you about Brexit. Such fake idealism.

And it was only after Brexit that the leading Brexiters acknowledged that they had lied about the threats and benefits and began, very tentatively at first to concede there were going to be problems.

As for that cake? Brexiters want to betreated as the EU would treat any non-member nation when it suits the UK's interests and  be given special treatment when it suits the UK's interests. Brexit means brexit except when it doesn't.

 

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=uKauP_1536844894

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

So are we to take I that Brexiteers believe none of this will happen?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/sep/12/day-to-day-effects-of-no-deal-brexit-stressed-in-new-impact-papers

 

 

 

2 hours ago, BangkokBaksida said:

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=uKauP_1536844894

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

The guy sums himself up perfectly..... he clearly doesn't appreciate the irony........

6 hours ago, bristolboy said:

So why have the hard Brexiters been so reluctant to challenge May? Poisoned chalice, anyone?

They haven't got the numbers. Plus, No-deal is still on the Cabinet table. However an equally valid question is why there is no challenge from the Remain camp, supposedly from the Labour Party. Well that's an easy answer given Corbyn's prior treachery to the Remain campaign. Just more of the same.

Still not one thing from the quitlings of what is GOOD about Brexit.

They and the government agree that UKs economy will crash

We will be subservient to WTO.

We will be less able to travel

We have to stockpile food.

We will be short of labour.

Pensions and healthcare will suffer

Industries will shrink 

Commerce will shrink or leave

 

So where is the good news about Brexit?

 

 

 

The last time there government made announcemens like these was during the cold war ... or WW2.

 

 https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/how-to-prepare-if-the-uk-leaves-the-eu-with-no-deal

 

 

34 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Still not one thing from the quitlings of what is GOOD about Brexit.

They and the government agree that UKs economy will crash

We will be subservient to WTO.

We will be less able to travel

We have to stockpile food.

We will be short of labour.

Pensions and healthcare will suffer

Industries will shrink 

Commerce will shrink or leave

So where is the good news about Brexit?

If the case for Brexit is zero, then why has Corbyn refused to line up the Labour Party firmly on the Remain side?

Interesting article about why May's threat of a no-deal brexit is her secret weapon to get Parliament to accept her version of Brexit. Although whether or not she can get the EU to accept it seems dubious.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/no-deal-brexit-theresa-may-cabinet-meeting-dominic-raab-a8535531.html

So it's really not about why can't Parliament come to an agreement about Brexit. It's about why can't Parliament agree with you about Brexit. Such fake idealism.
And it was only after Brexit that the leading Brexiters acknowledged that they had lied about the threats and benefits and began, very tentatively at first to concede there were going to be problems.
As for that cake? Brexiters want to betreated as the EU would treat any non-member nation when it suits the UK's interests and  be given special treatment when it suits the UK's interests. Brexit means brexit except when it doesn't.
 

No, it's not about Parliament agreeing with me is, it's about Parliament accepting what was voted for in 2016. Something they, in the main, have refused to do, hence why we are where we are.

Re the cake and eat it thing, this is a negotiation, or at least it's supposed to be. Of course, as a starting point, you ask for everything, the opposite side offers nothing, and then you meet somewhere in the middle. That's how negotiations work. And if the other side won't budge from offering nothing, you get up and walk away. Simple.

Problem here is Parliament is mainly full of people trying to row backwards; then you have the few who are rowing in the right direction, as per the referendum, but in a half-hearted manner without conviction and forever trying to appease those rowing backwards; and then you have an even smaller group who are rowing full steam ahead but who either don't have the balls or don't have the opportunity to take command of the boat. In short, it's a mess. And when I say "it", I mean Parliament.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

1 hour ago, rixalex said:

it's about Parliament accepting what was voted for in 2016. 

Maybe that’s true for you, but certainly not for most Brexiteers. Most Brexiteers want something else or a lot more than what was voted for in 2016. They don’t want free movement of people, they don’t want EU regulation/laws, and so on. All that was never part of the referendum. The referendum only asked whether to leave the EU or not (and even that only as advisory), never were voters presented with specific terms. 

 

If all you want really is the “Parliament accepting what was voted for in 2016”, then you must be ok with, for example, the U.K. leaving the EU but entering into an agreement which allows it access to the single market including accepting free movement of people and services and being under EU regulation. I’m quite sure you would not be ok with that, and the same applies for many if not most other Brexiteers. So it’s really not about the referendum, which was advisory in nature and completely vague in contents; it really is (for most Brexiteers) about something that was never agreed. 

Maybe that’s true for you, but certainly not for most Brexiteers. Most Brexiteers want something else or a lot more than what was voted for in 2016. They don’t want free movement of people, they don’t want EU regulation/laws, and so on. All that was never part of the referendum. The referendum only asked whether to leave the EU or not (and even that only as advisory), never were voters presented with specific terms. 
 
If all you want really is the “Parliament accepting what was voted for in 2016”, then you must be ok with, for example, the U.K. leaving the EU but entering into an agreement which allows it access to the single market including accepting free movement of people and services and being under EU regulation. I’m quite sure you would not be ok with that, and the same applies for many if not most other Brexiteers. So it’s really not about the referendum, which was advisory in nature and completely vague in contents; it really is (for most Brexiteers) about something that was never agreed. 

This disingenuous path (to put it politely) you are other remainers are taking that seeks to twist and convolute the past, will come back to bite you one day, you can be sure of that if nothing else.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

17 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Maybe that’s true for you, but certainly not for most Brexiteers. Most Brexiteers want something else or a lot more than what was voted for in 2016. They don’t want free movement of people, they don’t want EU regulation/laws, and so on. All that was never part of the referendum. The referendum only asked whether to leave the EU or not (and even that only as advisory), never were voters presented with specific terms. 

 

If all you want really is the “Parliament accepting what was voted for in 2016”, then you must be ok with, for example, the U.K. leaving the EU but entering into an agreement which allows it access to the single market including accepting free movement of people and services and being under EU regulation. I’m quite sure you would not be ok with that, and the same applies for many if not most other Brexiteers. So it’s really not about the referendum, which was advisory in nature and completely vague in contents; it really is (for most Brexiteers) about something that was never agreed. 

True.
The degree of future relations with the EU has never been defined and is still undefined. The unclear range spans from the canada model to the norway model, over a transitional period of x years, up to a new vote with remain in the eu. 

 

All other suggestions like may model, cherry picking or special solutions are fairytale castles in the air.

It is time that moves into uk politics again healthy realism.

21 hours ago, sandyf said:

Sign of the times.

 

London has been replaced by New York as the world’s most attractive financial centre, a survey has indicated, as Brexitprompts banks to shift jobs out of the city to keep access to Europe’s single market.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-london-new-york-financial-centre-eu-single-market-banks-a8534536.html

It's interesting that even when we were in the EUSSR and London was the financial centre of the world they still choose Frankfurt for the home of the ECB. Tells you all you need to know about who rules Europe now.

6 hours ago, kwilco said:

Still not one thing from the quitlings of what is GOOD about Brexit.

They and the government agree that UKs economy will crash

We will be subservient to WTO.

We will be less able to travel

We have to stockpile food.

We will be short of labour.

Pensions and healthcare will suffer

Industries will shrink 

Commerce will shrink or leave

 

So where is the good news about Brexit?

 

 

 

 

On ‎9‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 2:16 PM, kwilco said:

Come on Quitlings, just one concrete benefit from Brexit....just one...you've had 2 years to think of one....... how about 350 million for the NHS???

 

On ‎9‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 2:39 PM, nauseus said:

OK  a bedtime story...this was posted on the Brexit megathread as a previous iterration but you must have missed it. I'm certainly not going to rewrite it but edit/post again for your enjoyment:

 

The main leave points (with none seriously challenged or disputed by the remain side) are:

 

Sovereignty - UK sovereignty has been steadily eroded since 1973. The EEC Common Market mutated, "ever closer", to becoming a federal state, which the people of the UK did surely did not approve in the referendum of 1975. The broad population wrongly assumed that the EEC was purely economic and trading arrangement. The majority of British people do not wish their country to become a cluster of regions within a European federal state. EU bureaucracy and power is centralizing and eroding decision making powers from both national and local governments. The introduction of qualified majority voting allows decisions to be made against the interest of a single member. Most Britons still value their sovereignty and have shown that they want to be British. 

 

Democracy - the British system of government and constitution could be improved but it is still far preferable to this EU structure, with a selected group of commissioners basically running the show. Several of these commissioners are just second-rate so-called politicians put into place by already established pals or by arrangement and/or agreement with other allies. The anti-democratic nature of the EU government and the significant rewards of being part of it encourage a dictatorial mind-set and large scale corruption - the 1999 commission fraud scandal is enough evidence of that! 

 

Law /Justice - UK law is secondary to EU law and the majority of (informed) British people showed that they don't want that. They also do not want to lose their freedoms and rights e.g. to be presumed innocent of any crime before being proved guilty and they rejected a regime of corpus juris.

 

The majority of British people showed that they do not want the imposition of endless regulations and laws that are not made in the UK but which override British Law. The EU can't even abide by its own rules. EU (Dublin) Regulation(s) specify that asylum applications must be processed at the point of entry into the EU. Greece and Italy have failed to fulfill these obligations and assistance from the EU is farcical, especially by Merkel who has done the opposite. Parts of the Lisbon Treaty have been ignored in order to keep Greece afloat.

 

Immigration - needs complete control now. Freedom of movement used to be for EC/EU workers only, now it’s the whole show. UK housing and all services cannot keep pace with the ridiculous rate of influx, both from the EU and elsewhere. Our green and pleasant land is disappearing fast enough as it is!

 

Economy and cost - at least 9 billion Euros net per year is paid into the EU coffers by the UK and even Maggie Thatcher's rebate is likely to disappear soon. If we stay in then it can only be a matter of time before the Euro is forced upon the UK in place of sterling. The Euro has already shown itself as being unfit for purpose for several of the countries with previously weaker national economies. The scale of money creation and bond buying by ECB is similar to that of the US after 2008. Many parts of the EU are still plagued by high debt and unemployment and the EU still has the worst economic performance in the developed world, despite attempts to slap some kind of tax on just about everything! Ultimately, if we stay in, the EU will no doubt request all of the assets of the B o E be transferred to the ECB - once the UK currency and assets are gone, then the UK economy is gone and there is no way back!

 

Efficiency - The EU is not run efficiently. In fact it is wasteful, as shown by the ridiculous migration of the European Parliament from Brussels to Strasbourg for just 4 days each month, mainly to keep French noses in the air! The Common Agricultural Policy chews up 40% of the budget, again mainly for the benefit of French farmers (subsidies). The CAP has led to higher prices for consumers although some reform has reduced some of the initial wastage. But the CAP has provided little benefit and the UK should have been much tougher with this from day one. Ditto, of course the Common Fishing Policy, which has been a disaster for British fishing since we joined the EEC in 1973. 

 

The Future - (imho)

Without the necessary shock (of Brexit) the EU will not reform. Possibly now it will, a bit. But unchecked it will continue down its path to becoming a federal super state. The EU up to now has stubbornly refused reform (you can ask Cameron about that). The people that control the EU are not able to be easily removed but at least the members of the British parliament are. Personally, after observing the Eurocrats in action, I do not see any way to be able to trust them or give them ward of my country, especially as it seems that the wasteful mismanagement of the EU will continue, or probably worsen.

 

The real question of the referendum was really "Do you want to be a Briton or a European"? I always preferred the first option. 

 

If they could just have stuck with a common market all would be good.  

 

 

Are you suffering from cognitive loss (medication and therapy is available) In answer to your question  "what is GOOD about Brexit?" you have been given seven imo good reasons and have not addressed one but continue to make one line snide, conjectured hypotheses which stagnates the debate.

It would be helpful if you could address these points as a constructive argument. If you ask questions it's reasonable to expect you answer questions...……..I look forward to constructive answers.

  

21 hours ago, transam said:

Well thank you....Plus you are right, the British back then did not want to be controlled by Germans, Brexit folk voted for the same thing....?

There is a quite a bit of difference between being controlled by another country and doing close co-operation between nations.

 

I now see that Brexiters wish to associate with their war hero dad's who fight the war and defended UK from German invasion. Brexiters also want to show that they can be as tough and heroic as their daddys. It all makes more sense now why 70+ folks are so keen Brexit supporters. 

2 minutes ago, oilinki said:

There is a quite a bit of difference between being controlled by another country and doing close co-operation between nations.

 

I now see that Brexiters wish to associate with their war hero dad's who fight the war and defended UK from German invasion. Brexiters also want to show that they can be as tough and heroic as their daddys. It all makes more sense now why 70+ folks are so keen Brexit supporters. 

The UK has done the close cooperation thing for many years, hence Brexit...

 

As for "daddies" and 70+ folk, well they have lived a long life remembering the past and how life has changed during that life...We oldies may have different opinions, for sure life has improved in many ways through our own work and in many cases going on strike to make those improvements..But now, instead of looking after our own we have to look after other nations that have got nowhere, done sod all, and these nations now have a say in what WE do..Hence Brexit.

 

 

Just now, aright said:

 

 

Are you suffering from cognitive loss (medication and therapy is available) In answer to your question  "what is GOOD about Brexit?" you have been given seven imo good reasons and have not addressed one but continue to make one line snide, conjectured hypotheses which stagnates the debate.

It would be helpful if you could address these points as a constructive argument. If you ask questions it's reasonable to expect you answer questions...……..I look forward to constructive answers.

  

I agree, but best to ignore posters like the one to whom you replied.  The poster is quite happy to ignore the recent post pointing out the possibly (in their opinion) good reasons for leaving the eu!

 

Posters like this are, for reasons of their own,  incapable of thinking for themselves. ☹️

26 minutes ago, aright said:

 

 

Are you suffering from cognitive loss (medication and therapy is available) In answer to your question  "what is GOOD about Brexit?" you have been given seven imo good reasons and have not addressed one but continue to make one line snide, conjectured hypotheses which stagnates the debate.

It would be helpful if you could address these points as a constructive argument. If you ask questions it's reasonable to expect you answer questions...……..I look forward to constructive answers.

  

Thanks, I put up the same post ages ago. No challenge at all then, either. Not one.  

13 hours ago, BangkokBaksida said:

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=uKauP_1536844894

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

The guy needs braces and a knotted handkerchief!

 

What a moron

23 minutes ago, transam said:

The UK has done the close cooperation thing for many years, hence Brexit...

 

As for "daddies" and 70+ folk, well they have lived a long life remembering the past and how life has changed during that life...We oldies may have different opinions, for sure life has improved in many ways through our own work and in many cases going on strike to make those improvements..But now, instead of looking after our own we have to look after other nations that have got nowhere, done sod all, and these nations now have a say in what WE do..Hence Brexit.

 

 

And because this close co-operation has been extremely good for Britain, Brexit must happen? Makes perfect sense, not.

 

On sociological / psychological front the daddies who came back from war were highly damaged individuals and so were the moms back home. War is not easy.

 

I guess this damage was passed to the boomers, who got an irreversible hate against Germans. That's understandable. Later generations have healed from the war wounds and are able see the future, without constantly clinging to the past horrors. That might be one reason for the generation cap on Brexit votes.

11 hours ago, SheungWan said:

They haven't got the numbers. Plus, No-deal is still on the Cabinet table. However an equally valid question is why there is no challenge from the Remain camp, supposedly from the Labour Party. Well that's an easy answer given Corbyn's prior treachery to the Remain campaign. Just more of the same.

Yes, Corbyn will have to force the People's Vote option. The CONs will do anything to avoid an election.

7 hours ago, kwilco said:

Still not one thing from the quitlings of what is GOOD about Brexit.

They and the government agree that UKs economy will crash

We will be subservient to WTO.

We will be less able to travel

We have to stockpile food.

We will be short of labour.

Pensions and healthcare will suffer

Industries will shrink 

Commerce will shrink or leave

 

So where is the good news about Brexit?

 

 

 

In all fairness, Nauseus posted a list. Mostly intangibles except that we would save the membership fees. This is true but I think the fees are modest

1 minute ago, oilinki said:

And because this close co-operation has been extremely good for Britain, Brexit must happen? Makes perfect sense, not.

 

On sociological / psychological front the daddies who came back from war were highly damaged individuals and so were the moms back home. War is not easy.

 

I guess this damage was passed to the boomers, who got an irreversible hate against Germans. That's understandable. Later generations have healed from the war wounds and are able see the future, without constantly clinging to the past horrors. That might be one reason for the generation cap on Brexit votes.

Think you have got that wrong...I don't hate Germans, I can just see whats one the (future) wall. Many including me can see where the EU is going, controlling the UK whilst the UK ploughs mega money in to finance those who have done nothing to improve their stuff..