So what did the Brexit supporters gain?

[chiang mai]

That all depends on whether you are interested in looking at the short-term turmoil during a UK - EU divorce, or the actual results of that divorce .

Let's be clear KH: pre referendum, several things were pointed out regarding the economy and the associated pain and those things were all labelled scaremongering. Today, I think those chickens are coming home to roost and if in six months they're laying eggs, I'll be rubbing you and yours noses in that fact, if not I'll be eating humble pie. But in no way shape or form are you going to even successfully hint that we should wait six or ten years before assessing where we are, even a stopped clock is correct twice a day and we all know that in ten years, things will have normalised. The point of highlighting risks pre referendum was to say, there will be much much pain if we Brexit, not that we'll never heal from that pain. so six months it is and then after that perhaps another six months.

Who gave you the authority to set the agenda for judgement dates? And the anti-brexit scaremongering was 'Permanent damage with no recovery. Think of your children and the future'.

Who? Me!

Welcome to reality, those frequent reviews of the economy against the Brexit objectives will be a feature of the landscape from here on out so best be prepared for them.

[Khun Han]

Anybody who claims that we can judge the results of brexit before we have actually brexited has, how shall I say, issues with logic and time.

[MissAndry]

Having followed this thread quite a bit and contributed a couple of times, I find it interesting that every(i may have missed one or 2 posts,sorry if so) person who supports exiting still cannot give a definitive, qualified reason as to what has or will improve....

Not only did I state 'Cameron gone' was a definite improvement from the Brexit vote.

But you agreed with me.

Here

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/927277-so-what-did-the-brexit-supporters-gain/?p=10959138

[Jip99]

Presumably the cease-fire starts at Midnight ?

It just gives me time to remind you that I have a copy of your prediction that Sterling would slump by 20%.

Obviously if the GBP/THB rate is anything over 40, the reminder will be on me!

You will need to post a link to that "prediction" because I don't believe any such thing exists plus we are now all well aware of your propensity to tell, ahem, porkies!

................. and yet you cite no evidence for that accusation ?

A common characteristic for a Remoaner.

Come on Jip, Guesthouse owns you and soon I will too unless you prove what you say, where's the link, you said you have a copy?

So you still haven't produced any evidence................ typical.

[ljd1308]

Having followed this thread quite a bit and contributed a couple of times, I find it interesting that every(i may have missed one or 2 posts,sorry if so) person who supports exiting still cannot give a definitive, qualified reason as to what has or will improve....

Not only did I state 'Cameron gone' was a definite improvement from the Brexit vote.

But you agreed with me.

That is true of course, but not sure if you realise that you didn't need to leave the EU to get rid of him....they have these things called elections whereby you can vote for your leaders.

In the next election in the UK, if the people had voted Cameron out then he would no longer be prime minister......the added bonus of doing it this way is that you could actually choose the new PM.

I guess I am saying there were other options to get rid of him that did not involve a risk to the future of the entire country.

If you like I could look up some information on elections, but pretty much every democratic country has them so it shouldn't be too hard to find the info yourself if you google it. But do let me know if you need help with that.

[MissAndry]

Having followed this thread quite a bit and contributed a couple of times, I find it interesting that every(i may have missed one or 2 posts,sorry if so) person who supports exiting still cannot give a definitive, qualified reason as to what has or will improve....

Not only did I state 'Cameron gone' was a definite improvement from the Brexit vote.

But you agreed with me.

That is true of course, but not sure if you realise that you didn't need to leave the EU to get rid of him....they have these things called elections whereby you can vote for your leaders.

In the next election in the UK, if the people had voted Cameron out then he would no longer be prime minister......the added bonus of doing it this way is that you could actually choose the new PM.

I guess I am saying there were other options to get rid of him that did not involve a risk to the future of the entire country.

If you like I could look up some information on elections, but pretty much every democratic country has them so it shouldn't be too hard to find the info yourself if you google it. But do let me know if you need help with that.

First, that would have taken another 3 years

Second, the MPs select the PM not the voters.

But now you're weaseling out of your question. You asked, I answered, you weaseled.

Here is a very similar whinge to the remainers ........... (replace Romans with Brexit voters)

[chiang mai]

Anybody who claims that we can judge the results of brexit before we have actually brexited has, how shall I say, issues with logic and time.

This is not about judging the results of Brexit, as you well understand. This is about measuring the amount of pain suffered on the road to achieving Brexit results, six or ten years down the road, pain that the Brexit camp labelled as scaremongering, simply because they didn't comprehend it all.

I'm happy for you to have the last word here because I've no intention of going backwards and forwards on all of this, especially not with other posters who simply make up stories as they go along. Me, I'm going to continue to watch and see what happens to the markets and to the Pound and comment accordingly, as said previously, if it it all goes South for more than six months I will rub your noses in it, that way maybe you'll know better the next time something like this comes along. OUT

[Mark123456]

Based on the map of voting patterns, wouldn't a wall around Greater London be more appropriate?

Yes, let's do that. As a Londoner, I'd be happy with that. The capital generates 22% of the GDP of the entire country - let's see how well the rest of the UK does without that contribution.

[chiang mai]

You will need to post a link to that "prediction" because I don't believe any such thing exists plus we are now all well aware of your propensity to tell, ahem, porkies!

................. and yet you cite no evidence for that accusation ?

A common characteristic for a Remoaner.

Come on Jip, Guesthouse owns you and soon I will too unless you prove what you say, where's the link, you said you have a copy?

So you still haven't produced any evidence................ typical.

Other readers can view the evidence and make their own judgements:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/877654-uk-expats-for-eu-exit/page-39#entry10963818

Goodbye Jip!

[Khun Han]

Anybody who claims that we can judge the results of brexit before we have actually brexited has, how shall I say, issues with logic and time.

This is not about judging the results of Brexit, as you well understand. This is about measuring the amount of pain suffered on the road to achieving Brexit results, six or ten years down the road, pain that the Brexit camp labelled as scaremongering, simply because they didn't comprehend it all.

I'm happy for you to have the last word here because I've no intention of going backwards and forwards on all of this, especially not with other posters who simply make up stories as they go along. Me, I'm going to continue to watch and see what happens to the markets and to the Pound and comment accordingly, as said previously, if it it all goes South for more than six months I will rub your noses in it, that way maybe you'll know better the next time something like this comes along. OUT

And I'm going to take the last word because your claim that the anti-brexit scaremongering was about short-term interim effects is a total falsehood. It wasn't (and still isn't): it was (and still is) based around 'selfish, stupid, bigoted, aged (mix and match)' brexiters not caring about wrecking the country for future generations. So your own personal claim that everything will be ok in the long term goes against all that and affirms the brexit view.

[ljd1308]

Having followed this thread quite a bit and contributed a couple of times, I find it interesting that every(i may have missed one or 2 posts,sorry if so) person who supports exiting still cannot give a definitive, qualified reason as to what has or will improve....

Not only did I state 'Cameron gone' was a definite improvement from the Brexit vote.

But you agreed with me.

That is true of course, but not sure if you realise that you didn't need to leave the EU to get rid of him....they have these things called elections whereby you can vote for your leaders.

In the next election in the UK, if the people had voted Cameron out then he would no longer be prime minister......the added bonus of doing it this way is that you could actually choose the new PM.

I guess I am saying there were other options to get rid of him that did not involve a risk to the future of the entire country.

If you like I could look up some information on elections, but pretty much every democratic country has them so it shouldn't be too hard to find the info yourself if you google it. But do let me know if you need help with that.

First, that would have taken another 3 years

Second, the MPs select the PM not the voters.

But now you're weaseling out of your question. You asked, I answered, you weaseled.

Here is a very similar whinge to the remainers ........... (replace Romans with Brexit voters)

I wouldn't call it weaseling out, however you are free to do so and I know from experience you have a penchant for using inappropriate names, so using other irrelevant and inappropriate terms obviously isn't beyond you.

But feel free to do so and if the only positive you have taken from leaving the EU is having someone resign from their job then well done, I guess that is fair enough and beyond argument. I agree he is not someone you would want leading your country, but I would say that about his entire party too.

As for the bolded bit, do you really not understand how democracy works? It comes across as if you think that a referendum should be held for every decision...is that the case?

Just to help you out, here is a link to a website that gives a very basic overview: http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/members/electing-mps/

And to be honest, I am not sure why you or anyone else would call someone a whinger when he or she asks questions you don't know the answer too. It is ok to admit you don't know rather than deflect with(admittedly funny) Monty Python clips which really are not relevant in any way to voting to leave the EU......if I or anyone else wants to view those for a bit of a giggle there is always youtube, we don't need it added to a serious conversation.

Maybe you should start a new thread for funny Monty Python clips? I would subscribe to that.

[Khun Han]

Based on the map of voting patterns, wouldn't a wall around Greater London be more appropriate?

Yes, let's do that. As a Londoner, I'd be happy with that. The capital generates 22% of the GDP of the entire country - let's see how well the rest of the UK does without that contribution.

And it's a self-fulfilling argument, just like the Bangkok one, because of hundreds of years of unequal distribution of assets. But that's another argument for another time.

My remark that you quoted was a throwaway joke in response to chiang mai's throwaway joke, by the way.

[chiang mai]

Anybody who claims that we can judge the results of brexit before we have actually brexited has, how shall I say, issues with logic and time.

This is not about judging the results of Brexit, as you well understand. This is about measuring the amount of pain suffered on the road to achieving Brexit results, six or ten years down the road, pain that the Brexit camp labelled as scaremongering, simply because they didn't comprehend it all.

I'm happy for you to have the last word here because I've no intention of going backwards and forwards on all of this, especially not with other posters who simply make up stories as they go along. Me, I'm going to continue to watch and see what happens to the markets and to the Pound and comment accordingly, as said previously, if it it all goes South for more than six months I will rub your noses in it, that way maybe you'll know better the next time something like this comes along. OUT

And I'm going to take the last word because your claim that the anti-brexit scaremongering was about short-term interim effects is a total falsehood. It wasn't (and still isn't): it was (and still is) based around 'selfish, stupid, bigoted, aged (mix and match)' brexiters not caring about wrecking the country for future generations. So your own personal claim that everything will be ok in the long term goes against all that and affirms the brexit view.

Freudian slip or not it seems we agree, finally, why didn't you just say so in the first place:

"it was (and still is) based around 'selfish, stupid, bigoted, aged (mix and match)' brexiters not caring about wrecking the country for future generations".

Sorry, I'm truly all done now.

[Khun Han]

^ Well I'm not done because earlier today you were claiming that things will be ok economically in the long term from brexit, and now you are claiming that they won't be! It seems to me that, like most other Remainers, you just jump onboard any argument that suits your anti-brexit stance, even when the arguments are contradictory. And you call us brexiters stupid! Amazing!

[Mark123456]

Based on the map of voting patterns, wouldn't a wall around Greater London be more appropriate?

Yes, let's do that. As a Londoner, I'd be happy with that. The capital generates 22% of the GDP of the entire country - let's see how well the rest of the UK does without that contribution.

And it's a self-fulfilling argument, just like the Bangkok one, because of hundreds of years of unequal distribution of assets. But that's another argument for another time.

My remark that you quoted was a throwaway joke in response to chiang mai's throwaway joke, by the way.

Hundreds of years of unequal distribution of assets? I think you need to brush up on your history. Up until roughly 100 years ago, the North was richer than the South, and had been since the start of the industrial revolution. I don't suppose there were many northerners complaining about it at the time. So that's 100 years at most, not hundreds of years.

[Ricardo]

"Britain's decision to leave the EU has led to a "dramatic deterioration" in economic activity, not seen since the aftermath of the financial crisis.

Data from IHS Markit's Purchasing Managers' Index, or PMI, shows a fall to 47.7 in July, the lowest level since April in 2009. A reading below 50 indicates contraction.

Both manufacturing and service sectors saw a decline in output and orders. However, exports picked up, driven by the weakening of the pound."

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36864273

[elliss]

Obviously if the GBP/THB rate is anything over 40, the reminder will be on me!

Like it , forever the optimist .

[sandyf]

A friend believes that the UK should cater to both groups, Remainers should occupy the southern part of England whilst Brexiteers should be moved as far from the cinque ports as possible and occupy all the land North of say Sheffield. A wall could be built across the country, from Blackpool to Hull and this would mirror Hadrians Wall further North. Now admittedly the Remainers would loose the Lake District but it seems like a fairly responsible proposition to me.

Glad you said north of Sheffield, can't handle any more visa problems.

[chiang mai]

^ Well I'm not done because earlier today you were claiming that things will be ok economically in the long term from brexit, and now you are claiming that they won't be! It seems to me that, like most other Remainers, you just jump onboard any argument that suits your anti-brexit stance, even when the arguments are contradictory. And you call us brexiters stupid! Amazing!

"it was (and still is) based around 'selfish, stupid, bigoted, aged (mix and match)' brexiters not caring about wrecking the country for future generations".

Those were YOUR words, not mine, my long term views have not changed one bit.

[Khun Han]

^ Well I'm not done because earlier today you were claiming that things will be ok economically in the long term from brexit, and now you are claiming that they won't be! It seems to me that, like most other Remainers, you just jump onboard any argument that suits your anti-brexit stance, even when the arguments are contradictory. And you call us brexiters stupid! Amazing!

"it was (and still is) based around 'selfish, stupid, bigoted, aged (mix and match)' brexiters not caring about wrecking the country for future generations".

Those were YOUR words, not mine, my long term views have not changed one bit.

What was it one of your crowd was saying about deliberate ignorance recently? And here you are, twisting my framing of the cliche view of brexiters held by remainers, and trying to present it as my own view. Intellectual dishonesty of the worst type.

But, to get back ontopic, the scaremongering was always and still is about long-term damage. Your claim that the scaremongering was only about short-term damage is a falsehood. And your insistence/demands that we should only focus on short-term turbulence as a measure of the success or failure of brexit is a nonsense.

[Khun Han]

................. and yet you cite no evidence for that accusation ?

A common characteristic for a Remoaner.

Come on Jip, Guesthouse owns you and soon I will too unless you prove what you say, where's the link, you said you have a copy?

So you still haven't produced any evidence................ typical.

Other readers can view the evidence and make their own judgements:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/877654-uk-expats-for-eu-exit/page-39#entry10963818

Goodbye Jip!

I followed your link to the exchanges and it appears that you have a propensity for dragging debates down to personal insults and bickering. The remainer campaign seems to attract a lot of these types. Civilised debate seems beyond a lot of them.

[chiang mai]

Oh I see, so next review in six or ten years then!

That all depends on whether you are interested in looking at the short-term turmoil during a UK - EU divorce, or the actual results of that divorce .

Let's be clear KH: pre referendum, several things were pointed out regarding the economy and the associated pain and those things were all labelled scaremongering. Today, I think those chickens are coming home to roost and if in six months they're laying eggs, I'll be rubbing you and yours noses in that fact, if not I'll be eating humble pie. But in no way shape or form are you going to even successfully hint that we should wait six or ten years before assessing where we are, even a stopped clock is correct twice a day and we all know that in ten years, things will have normalised. The point of highlighting risks pre referendum was to say, there will be much much pain if we Brexit, not that we'll never heal from that pain. so six months it is and then after that perhaps another six months.

Who gave you the authority to set the agenda for judgement dates? And the anti-brexit scaremongering was 'Permanent damage with no recovery. Think of your children and the future'.

"the anti-brexit scaremongering was 'Permanent damage with no recovery".

I've read a number of such statements during the debate over Brexit, most seem geared towards stockpiling excuses in the event of future Brexit failure; amongst them are, the country is screwed because a Remainer was made PM; delaying the filing of clause 50 looses valuable time which will cause Brexit to fail; and now we have anti-Brexit scaremongering was permanent damage with no recovery!

My take on all of this is that the Remain camp fought a battle with a series of economic arguments that were generally pretty sound and accurate, now that the battle is lost most of those Remainers are onboard with the idea of Brexiting, I know I certainly am, to do otherwise would be foolish indeed and in nobody's interests. Having said that, integrity is important to many and what is fact must be acknowledged as such rather than casually dismissed and whilst it's not always nice to say I told you, if and when the chickens comes home to roost folks need to be made aware they were forewarned, those chickens aren't roosting yet but their certainly walking towards the hen house in a hurry.

So the short term means pain but in the longer term things will settle down, how long is short I don't know but I guess it's measured in years greater than three, neither do I know how the longer term is defined but I guess that means more than seven years. But to deny that longer term things will not settle down is silly, America settled down and improved greatly after the Great Depression although many never thought it could.

[chiang mai]

Come on Jip, Guesthouse owns you and soon I will too unless you prove what you say, where's the link, you said you have a copy?

So you still haven't produced any evidence................ typical.

Other readers can view the evidence and make their own judgements:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/877654-uk-expats-for-eu-exit/page-39#entry10963818

Goodbye Jip!

I followed your link to the exchanges and it appears that you have a propensity for dragging debates down to personal insults and bickering. The remainer campaign seems to attract a lot of these types. Civilised debate seems beyond a lot of them.

There is no Remain campaign, that was yesterday, everyone is now Brexit. Do try to keep up!

[happy Joe]

Personally I do not see any gain for the UK in the Brexit operation. Neither short nor long term.

However the warning was heard by people on the continent:

http://www.archyxx.com/the-brexit-causes-a-resurgence-of-european-sentiment/

Brussels cannot postpone any longer a modification of its statutes to more democracy and less standards. This popular wish is now supported by Germany, Italy and France. So he lead.

I also think that the accession of Turkey is now definitively ruled out.

At last, it seems that the EU has understood the danger of causing our friend Putin opening the doors too quickly to former members of the USSR. I am sure it will now involve Russia to Ukraine and Georgia for future fruitful exchanges.

[chiang mai]

"Britain’s biggest companies have issued the highest number of second-quarter profit warnings since the ­financial crisis, new analysis has shown, as Brexit has compounded an uncertain economic outlook".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/07/23/uk-profit-warnings-rise-to-crisis-highs-amid-brexit-uncertainty/

[Jip99]

................. and yet you cite no evidence for that accusation ?

A common characteristic for a Remoaner.

Come on Jip, Guesthouse owns you and soon I will too unless you prove what you say, where's the link, you said you have a copy?

So you still haven't produced any evidence................ typical.

Other readers can view the evidence and make their own judgements:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/877654-uk-expats-for-eu-exit/page-39#entry10963818

Goodbye Jip!

The only evidence I see there is of your 'O' level in woodwork!

[Jip99]

^ Well I'm not done because earlier today you were claiming that things will be ok economically in the long term from brexit, and now you are claiming that they won't be! It seems to me that, like most other Remainers, you just jump onboard any argument that suits your anti-brexit stance, even when the arguments are contradictory. And you call us brexiters stupid! Amazing!

"it was (and still is) based around 'selfish, stupid, bigoted, aged (mix and match)' brexiters not caring about wrecking the country for future generations".

Those were YOUR words, not mine, my long term views have not changed one bit.

............... and have a guess who posted these words:-

..............................we will certainly Remain, the population is far too greedy to leave.

[GuestHouse]

The Brexit campaign used and still clings to the campaign slogan 'Project Fear' and 'Scaremongering' as derogatory terms to characterise the Remain position.

This deserves some examination.

Did the Remain campaign use projections of negative impacts of Brexit and if so what were they, where they 'Scaremongering', can they be described as instilling 'Fear'?

Yes Remain did use a raft of projected negative impacts for Brexit, these were almost entirely economic parameters, but also included loss of access to markets, loss of political influence on the world stage.

The economic projections were, for the most part, rooted in formal/structured economic forecasts which we can argue about the accuracy of and when/if these economic outcomes have/will come to fruition. Some of the worst projected outcomes where not plausible, but were recognised as such by the organisations producing the studies, some of the forecasts have already been demonstrated to be correct - The drop in the value of sterling, decreasing investment confidence, rise in UK profit warnings &c.,

I don't think even the most ardent Brexit supporter will state there are no negative impacts from Brexit (though again, they may argue the depth and time scale of those impacts).

The middle ground (excluding the extremes of both sides of the Referendum debate) will almost certainly agree its too early yet to judge the outcome.

The lack of access to markets, and loss of political weight is yet to play out. But loss of control over European decisions is an absolute outcome of Brexit, and nobody in the Brexit camp has explained how Brexit's core aims shall be achieved in the face of categorical statements from the EU, Germany, France and others that the UK shall not be given tariff free access to EU markets without accepting EU laws, regulations and the free movement of people.

So once again too early to judge on that one (But no clear way forward in sight).

Is the charge of 'Scaremongering' and the use of 'Fear' (Project Fear) justified?

Well it seems that on the extremes of the Remain support it might be, a few people did cling and still do cling to only the worst case scenarios.

But, if we accept its too early to judge the economic outcomes, then we must accept its too early to dismiss the worst projections - So the jury is still out.

'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' was used in the Referendum campaigns and its impact has been measured and can be seen. This however is not the Remain's 'Project Fear' or Remain's 'Scaremongering', but that of the Brexit campaign which shamelessly used 'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' when they integrated racism and xenophobia into the Brexit campaign.

'Fear', 'Scaremongering' is at the core of the xenophobia and racism employed by the Brexit campaign and is still visible amongst Brexit supporters and the comments they make.

The hypocrisy of such xenophobia and racism coming from British migrants to another country is seemingly lost in the eagerness to express the bigotry to which the Brexit campaign has given a voice and which the Brexit campaign has legitimised.

The irony is that Brexit, predicated to such a large extent on 'Fear', 'Scaremongering', xenophobia and racism characterises the Remain campaign as 'Project Fear'.

It would be laughable if it was not so cynical and, as history tells us, dangerous.

[Jip99]

The Brexit campaign used and still clings to the campaign slogan 'Project Fear' and 'Scaremongering' as derogatory terms to characterise the Remain position.

This deserves some examination.

Did the Remain campaign use projections of negative impacts of Brexit and if so what were they, where they 'Scaremongering', can they be described as instilling 'Fear'?

Yes Remain did use a raft of projected negative impacts for Brexit, these were almost entirely economic parameters, but also included loss of access to markets, loss of political influence on the world stage.

The economic projections were, for the most part, rooted in formal/structured economic forecasts which we can argue about the accuracy of and when/if these economic outcomes have/will come to fruition. Some of the worst projected outcomes where not plausible, but were recognised as such by the organisations producing the studies, some of the forecasts have already been demonstrated to be correct - The drop in the value of sterling, decreasing investment confidence, rise in UK profit warnings &c.,

I don't think even the most ardent Brexit supporter will state there are no negative impacts from Brexit (though again, they may argue the depth and time scale of those impacts).

The middle ground (excluding the extremes of both sides of the Referendum debate) will almost certainly agree its too early yet to judge the outcome.

The lack of access to markets, and loss of political weight is yet to play out. But loss of control over European decisions is an absolute outcome of Brexit, and nobody in the Brexit camp has explained how Brexit's core aims shall be achieved in the face of categorical statements from the EU, Germany, France and others that the UK shall not be given tariff free access to EU markets without accepting EU laws, regulations and the free movement of people.

So once again too early to judge on that one (But no clear way forward in sight).

Is the charge of 'Scaremongering' and the use of 'Fear' (Project Fear) justified?

Well it seems that on the extremes of the Remain support it might be, a few people did cling and still do cling to only the worst case scenarios.

But, if we accept its too early to judge the economic outcomes, then we must accept its too early to dismiss the worst projections - So the jury is still out.

'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' was used in the Referendum campaigns and its impact has been measured and can be seen. This however is not the Remain's 'Project Fear' or Remain's 'Scaremongering', but that of the Brexit campaign which shamelessly used 'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' when they integrated racism and xenophobia into the Brexit campaign.

'Fear', 'Scaremongering' is at the core of the xenophobia and racism employed by the Brexit campaign and is still visible amongst Brexit supporters and the comments they make.

The hypocrisy of such xenophobia and racism coming from British migrants to another country is seemingly lost in the eagerness to express the bigotry to which the Brexit campaign has given a voice and which the Brexit campaign has legitimised.

The irony is that Brexit, predicated to such a large extent on 'Fear', 'Scaremongering', xenophobia and racism characterises the Remain campaign as 'Project Fear'.

It would be laughable if it was not so cynical and, as history tells us, dangerous.

I agree with much of the above - we need much longer time to judge the impact. Many of those factors have not yet been negotiated but any judgement that causes either side to say "I told you so" is as futile as it is pathetic. We are where we are and whether that suits your own position is less important than working together positively for the future of the UK. Neither side should harp back to the pre-vote stage.

Cameron and the 'money men' totally misjudged the mood of the British people. Cynicism of politicians caused many to disbelieve the propaganda campaign and it was easy to see why much was tagged as 'Project Fear'. This belief has been justified when you see the likes of the IMF retracting earlier prediction and the likes of HSBC, Barclays NOT moving staff or HQ's as they threatened to do. Brits don't like being poked with a stick and I think that approach back-fired on Remain. As you suggest, all that is now history and where we go from here is what matters.

I whole-heartedly agree that xenophobia and racism has no place in modern. There is no doubt that extremists (on either side) will latch onto to such situations to justify their own cause and agenda - thankfully the worst of the extremists only represent a small minority.

Personally, I think that If we take away the extremes on either side then the middle ground is not that far from either of our beliefs.

[mfd101]

The Brexit campaign used and still clings to the campaign slogan 'Project Fear' and 'Scaremongering' as derogatory terms to characterise the Remain position.

This deserves some examination.

Did the Remain campaign use projections of negative impacts of Brexit and if so what were they, where they 'Scaremongering', can they be described as instilling 'Fear'?

Yes Remain did use a raft of projected negative impacts for Brexit, these were almost entirely economic parameters, but also included loss of access to markets, loss of political influence on the world stage.

The economic projections were, for the most part, rooted in formal/structured economic forecasts which we can argue about the accuracy of and when/if these economic outcomes have/will come to fruition. Some of the worst projected outcomes where not plausible, but were recognised as such by the organisations producing the studies, some of the forecasts have already been demonstrated to be correct - The drop in the value of sterling, decreasing investment confidence, rise in UK profit warnings &c.,

I don't think even the most ardent Brexit supporter will state there are no negative impacts from Brexit (though again, they may argue the depth and time scale of those impacts).

The middle ground (excluding the extremes of both sides of the Referendum debate) will almost certainly agree its too early yet to judge the outcome.

The lack of access to markets, and loss of political weight is yet to play out. But loss of control over European decisions is an absolute outcome of Brexit, and nobody in the Brexit camp has explained how Brexit's core aims shall be achieved in the face of categorical statements from the EU, Germany, France and others that the UK shall not be given tariff free access to EU markets without accepting EU laws, regulations and the free movement of people.

So once again too early to judge on that one (But no clear way forward in sight).

Is the charge of 'Scaremongering' and the use of 'Fear' (Project Fear) justified?

Well it seems that on the extremes of the Remain support it might be, a few people did cling and still do cling to only the worst case scenarios.

But, if we accept its too early to judge the economic outcomes, then we must accept its too early to dismiss the worst projections - So the jury is still out.

'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' was used in the Referendum campaigns and its impact has been measured and can be seen. This however is not the Remain's 'Project Fear' or Remain's 'Scaremongering', but that of the Brexit campaign which shamelessly used 'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' when they integrated racism and xenophobia into the Brexit campaign.

'Fear', 'Scaremongering' is at the core of the xenophobia and racism employed by the Brexit campaign and is still visible amongst Brexit supporters and the comments they make.

The hypocrisy of such xenophobia and racism coming from British migrants to another country is seemingly lost in the eagerness to express the bigotry to which the Brexit campaign has given a voice and which the Brexit campaign has legitimised.

The irony is that Brexit, predicated to such a large extent on 'Fear', 'Scaremongering', xenophobia and racism characterises the Remain campaign as 'Project Fear'.

It would be laughable if it was not so cynical and, as history tells us, dangerous.

I agree with much of the above - we need much longer time to judge the impact. Many of those factors have not yet been negotiated but any judgement that causes either side to say "I told you so" is as futile as it is pathetic. We are where we are and whether that suits your own position is less important than working together positively for the future of the UK. Neither side should harp back to the pre-vote stage.

Cameron and the 'money men' totally misjudged the mood of the British people. Cynicism of politicians caused many to disbelieve the propaganda campaign and it was easy to see why much was tagged as 'Project Fear'. This belief has been justified when you see the likes of the IMF retracting earlier prediction and the likes of HSBC, Barclays NOT moving staff or HQ's as they threatened to do. Brits don't like being poked with a stick and I think that approach back-fired on Remain. As you suggest, all that is now history and where we go from here is what matters.

I whole-heartedly agree that xenophobia and racism has no place in modern. There is no doubt that extremists (on either side) will latch onto to such situations to justify their own cause and agenda - thankfully the worst of the extremists only represent a small minority.

Personally, I think that If we take away the extremes on either side then the middle ground is not that far from either of our beliefs.

As a Kiwi-born Australian now living in Thailand and watching anxiously from afar, I would like to make the following observations:

(1) Given that the Brits have decided to leave the club, slamming the door behind, rather than continuing to work to improve the club, I think we should not forget the rest of Europe - left in a doldrums of its own making, but which started out as a brave & good idea tracing its origins back to the early 50s, post WW2. The removal of British initiative and energy and pragmatism from the European mix seems to me infinitely sad.

(2) While, if I were a Brit, I would no doubt have voted to remain a member of the club, we should not neglect the real possibility that, after some years of upheaval and difficulty, it could - like, perhaps, Scottish independence - turn out the best thing, full of opportunities, for whatever remains of Britain. But only if the Brits collectively get their act together & stop whining. And not for Europe, alas, unless the Europeans learn some fundamental lessons from all of this. And not for NATO, with a decreasingly engaged USofA increasingly sidelined, and the Russians as trustworthy as ever.

(3) The Western world's ability to defend itself and to sell itself as a model for the rest of the world, is looking depressingly reduced all round. Meantime, the rise of China continues, albeit increasingly wobbly in its economics. The future is less and less predictable.