So what did the Brexit supporters gain?

[jayboy]

1 hour ago, cumgranosalum said:

 

referendums are not legally binding in the UK - and contrary to normal procedure - they are not democratic all they do is indicate what a majority of voters (those who actually voted) want on a particular day.

In the UK we have a government that is elected to do this sort of thing....they did a Pontius Pilot on the whole thing.

If there was an election today the referendum would be thrown out by a massive majority.

 

 

 

 

Sorry that's feeble.You may as well say General Elections are not democratic because they only indicate what the country wants on a particular day.Referendums certainly have drawbacks and should be undertaken very sparingly, but it's absurd to dismiss its authority as you appear to.

 

You are in my view completely wrong in believing another referendum would come up with a different result - wishful thinking.

[dick dasterdly]

On 9/1/2016 at 11:30 AM, jayboy said:

 

Sorry that's feeble.You may as well say General Elections are not democratic because they only indicate what the country wants on a particular day.Referendums certainly have drawbacks and should be undertaken very sparingly, but it's absurd to dismiss its authority as you appear to.

 

You are in my view completely wrong in believing another referendum would come up with a different result - wishful thinking.

Depends on whether the government come up with an appalling deal - something they may be tempted to do if they know they can they call another referendum at the conclusion of 'negotiations'.

[Khun Han]

With brexiters in charge of the negotiating, Dick, I can't envisage that scenario.

[MissAndry]

Essentially the decision was a choice between

remain - nothing changes.

leave - something might change.

 

The people voting to leave are hoping for a change because it can't get any worse for them, so any change must be for the good. It's simple really.

Edited September 1, 2016 by MissAndry

[AlexRich]

6 hours ago, autanic said:

 

I think that the rest of the EU, need to wake up and smell the coffee. We can have access to any product or service anywhere in the world. Britain buys goods already, from China, India, USA and everywhere else without having to accept thousands of migrants and pay into those Countries.  Well lets face it if HSBC or any other fancies moving to another Country in the EU, simply pay back any bail out funds paid to them from the British Tax Payer if any and book your flight, you won't be missed at all.

 

In Britain, we have a situation where poor white and black kids of 16 -25 years old are unemployed, ok its not as bad as France or Spain, but it is a waste. By implementing a fair pay scheme with benefits (not state benefits), then these kids can make a real life for themselves.  Not every one is going to go to University, but that does not mean they should be written off, teach them a trade, give them opportunity, not made to feel that if you can;t be bothered we will just give your job to a migrant.

 

Pound for Pound (kg for kg), Britain packs the biggest punch in the world for a country of its size with only Japan being more superior, in terms of work ethic and workforce and aspiration. People make out that the UK needs to access the single market, really it doesn't. Yes it's better for exports, but since joining the common market in 1972 Britain's exports have declined, it trade deficit couldn't be worse.

 

I think sometime, there is a bit of Donald Trump mentality in Europe towards the UK. They want a wall and they want the UK to pay for it or else they want it all their own way. 

 

The best of luck and thanks for the opportunity, we will see ourselves out.

 

The UK was the slowest growth developed economy in Europe between 1950 and 1972, but the fastest growth since joining the EU in 1973 to present day ... we can always access the EU with WTO tariffs, as can every other country. But there will be no free unfettered access ... without some reciprocation on free movement and money contributions. They have a huge incentive to make leaving the EU a foolish move, and that is what will dominate the negotiations ... not how many BMW sales will be lost. 

 

It's all very well to say good riddance to any company that wants to move, but it's essentially a childish reaction to things not working out as you have been told they would, and has very serious implications for growth and jobs ... but not in a good way. Strangely enough those kids you are so concerned about would rather have stayed part of Europe?

 

The UK has done well, but not in spite of the EU, because of it. Brexiteers talking about how strong the UK is economically conveniently forget that that strength has been built up over 40 plus years within the EU - an EU that they claim is holding us back? 

 

Go figure?

[AlexRich]

43 minutes ago, MissAndry said:

Essentially the decision was a choice between

remain - nothing changes.

leave - something might change.

 

The people voting to leave are hoping for a change because it can't get any worse for them, so any change must be for the good. It's simple really.

 

I think it was al, down to immigration concerns ... "Foreigners stealing our jobs" ... if there were some control on free movement the vote would never been carried on any other issue. Personally, I don't expect a great outcome.

[dick dasterdly]

55 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

With brexiters in charge of the negotiating, Dick, I can't envisage that scenario.

I wish I wasn't as cynical - but I can envisage that scenario .

[AlexRich]

56 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

With brexiters in charge of the negotiating, Dick, I can't envisage that scenario.

 

Yes, but what a smart move on the part of May ... put the three Amigo's in charge and let's see then deliver on their promises. The whispers coming out of the Civil Service (who understand the issues) is how clueless the ministers are about how the EU actually works ... doesn't augur well for the future negotiations ... my question is what happens if they fail to deliver an acceptable outcome? 

[dick dasterdly]

1 minute ago, AlexRich said:

 

I think it was al, down to immigration concerns ... "Foreigners stealing our jobs" ... if there were some control on free movement the vote would never been carried on any other issue. Personally, I don't expect a great outcome.

I think this is a touch simplistic and that there were a number of factors at work that resulted in the majority deciding that they'd prefer to be out of the EU.

[dick dasterdly]

11 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

Yes, but what a smart move on the part of May ... put the three Amigo's in charge and let's see then deliver on their promises. The whispers coming out of the Civil Service (who understand the issues) is how clueless the ministers are about how the EU actually works ... doesn't augur well for the future negotiations ... my question is what happens if they fail to deliver an acceptable outcome? 

An "acceptable" outcome is (as always) subjective.

 

If the worst comes to the worst - then the brexit vote should lead to tariffs being applied on all goods traded between the EU and the UK, but without the UK having to accept any EU immigrants who don't have a visa for a guaranteed job?

 

Edit - plus of course, not having to pay to be a member of the EU.

Edited September 1, 2016 by dick dasterdly

[AlexRich]

16 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I think this is a touch simplistic and that there were a number of factors at work that resulted in the majority deciding that they'd prefer to be out of the EU.

 

Most of the people I watched being interviewed talked only about immigrants ... there sole reason for voting. They seemed to be under the impression they would all be on the next bus home after the vote. The people that voted based on other reasons were a small minority, not sufficient to get over the finishing line.

[GuestHouse]

3 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

 

You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

Bringing a violent act in a known area of trouble into a Brexit debate is pathetic. The media will hype it as 'hate crime' but I would like to say that I thought you would know better - sadly I can't.

 

Given that the attack is reported as a hate crime and that such crimes have increased following the use of inflamatory language by Brexit leaders and Brexit politicians directed at imigrants and the use of fear of immigration by the Brexit campaign your call for shame is misdirected.

[AlexRich]

13 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

An "acceptable" outcome is (as always) subjective.

 

If the worst comes to the worst - then the brexit vote should lead to tariffs being applied on all goods traded between the EU and the UK, but without the UK having to accept any EU immigrants who don't have a visa for a guaranteed job?

 

Edit - plus of course, not having to pay to be a member of the EU.

 

Paying to be a member was a pointless argument as a small percentage fall in GDP eliminates the "saving" ... it was a rounding error in the scheme of things. And we all know that £350 million per week is a lie ... why did they feel the need to lie?

[dick dasterdly]

3 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

Most of the people I watched being interviewed talked only about immigrants ... there sole reason for voting. They seemed to be under the impression they would all be on the next bus home after the vote. The people that voted based on other reasons were a small minority, not sufficient to get over the finishing line.

But your previous post said "  "Foreigners stealing our jobs" ... "  - and I was trying to point out that its not even close to that simple.

 

Immigration - yes, that had a lot to do with the vote (IMO) - but it is far more complex than that.

[ljd1308]

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

 

 

It's the wrong question.Whether well educated or not people tend to have a very accurate understanding of what decision benefits their families and communities.Intelligence is spread evenly in a population.The inverted commas really refer to Thailand where the self appointed "good people" believe they have a monopoly on intelligence, and should block the majority if necessary.There was a slight suggestion of this Thai fallacy in the "educated" people who voted against Brexit in the UK.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

You are right, but I would argue that is the reason why there should never have been a referendum.

 

Your average man on the street might(i stress might) know what is best for him, but that isn't always for the overall good. Don't you think someone with a wider view of things and more information is better positioned to make a decision?

 

A fisherman may have voted to leave due to the catch restrictions not enabling him to make enough money(fair enough), but there are a thousand other things he hasn't taken into account that could adversely affect 100 people. 

 

I don't believe there is anyway any average person could have enough information to make an informed decision that was best for the country. The fact that there are potentially 17m different reasons just makes it worse because a very large majority won't get what they voted for and others will be negatively affected. 

[AlexRich]

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

But your previous post said "  "Foreigners stealing our jobs" ... "  - and I was trying to point out that its not even close to that simple.

 

Immigration - yes, that had a lot to do with the vote (IMO) - but it is far more complex than that.

 

Sorry, I don't agree. If there were low levels of immigration then the vote would have been heavily remain ... a landslide vote.

 

There were other issues of course, and some people with no concern for immigration voted Leave based on them ... but my point is that immigration concerns ... e.g. Turkey joining (a lie) won the day. 

[dick dasterdly]

6 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

Paying to be a member was a pointless argument as a small percentage fall in GDP eliminates the "saving" ... it was a rounding error in the scheme of things. And we all know that £350 million per week is a lie ... why did they feel the need to lie?

Why did the remainers feel the need to lie?

 

The wasteful cost of the EU is not a pointless argument and far from a 'rounding error' - at least to me.

[GuestHouse]

9 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

Most of the people I watched being interviewed talked only about immigrants ... there sole reason for voting. They seemed to be under the impression they would all be on the next bus home after the vote. The people that voted based on other reasons were a small minority, not sufficient to get over the finishing line.

 

Evidence of this came shortly after the referrendum result with an increase of attacks and abuse of foreigners, in a number of cases making reference to the refferendum result.

 

Own Brexit, own the racist abuse unleashed by Brexit's use of inflamatory language and stirring of xenophobia and racism.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-racism-uk-post-referendum-racism-hate-crime-eu-referendum-racism-unleashed-poland-racist-a7160786.html

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Why did the remainers feel the need to lie?

 

The wasteful cost of the EU is not a pointless argument and far from a 'rounding error' - at least to me.

 

UK GDP $2.85 Trilion dollars in 2015. 

 

As I said the contribution to the EU was insignificant ... and you have to look at the other side, what do you lose? No point looking only at saving if it costs you more somewhere else.

 

The value of UK Plc in US dollar terms has fallen by more than the saving, and that's just the. Currency fall. GDP is forecast to be slower in the future and government debt is to be higher ... and the full economic implications are yet to show themselves. There never was a credible economic argument, and that's why the focus went on immigration.

[dick dasterdly]

2 hours ago, jayboy said:

 

 

It's the wrong question.Whether well educated or not people tend to have a very accurate understanding of what decision benefits their families and communities.Intelligence is spread evenly in a population.The inverted commas really refer to Thailand where the self appointed "good people" believe they have a monopoly on intelligence, and should block the majority if necessary.There was a slight suggestion of this Thai fallacy in the "educated" people who voted against Brexit in the UK.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

Agree entirely with the emboldened part.

[AlexRich]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Agree entirely with the emboldened part.

 

So when the people voted for the National Socialists in Germany in the 1930's they instinctively knew what was good for them? 

 

I don't think the comment passed even surface level analysis.  

 

[dick dasterdly]

11 minutes ago, ljd1308 said:

You are right, but I would argue that is the reason why there should never have been a referendum.

 

Your average man on the street might(i stress might) know what is best for him, but that isn't always for the overall good. Don't you think someone with a wider view of things and more information is better positioned to make a decision?

 

A fisherman may have voted to leave due to the catch restrictions not enabling him to make enough money(fair enough), but there are a thousand other things he hasn't taken into account that could adversely affect 100 people. 

 

I don't believe there is anyway any average person could have enough information to make an informed decision that was best for the country. The fact that there are potentially 17m different reasons just makes it worse because a very large majority won't get what they voted for and others will be negatively affected. 

Similarly, I'd say that someone with a degree in geography/physics/chemistry etc. etc. are also unlikely to know much about the EU.

 

They are likely though to live in a 'nice' area and have no clue as to the life of those poor, uneducated people.

[dick dasterdly]

11 minutes ago, GuestHouse said:

 

Evidence of this came shortly after the referrendum result with an increase of attacks and abuse of foreigners, in a number of cases making reference to the refferendum result.

 

Own Brexit, own the racist abuse unleashed by Brexit's use of inflamatory language and stirring of xenophobia and racism.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-racism-uk-post-referendum-racism-hate-crime-eu-referendum-racism-unleashed-poland-racist-a7160786.html

Sadly, I think you may well be right that the brexit vote resulted in a few yobs thinking it a good reason to attack foreigners.

 

BUT - yobs have been attacking those they dislike for a long time - and the vast, vast majority of Brits. still wouldn't even dream of attacking foreigners.

[jayboy]

Similarly, I'd say that someone with a degree in geography/physics/chemistry etc. etc. are also unlikely to know much about the EU.

 

They are likely though to live in a 'nice' area and have no clue as to the life of those poor, uneducated people.

I would go so far as to say that whether a voter holds a degree in any discipline is entirely irrelevant.There is a further issue.Once you begin to attribute special significance or weight to a certain class of voter the whole spirit of democracy is undermined.

At one time special weight was given to property owners, men, those with a prescribed level of income.Gradually over time these barriers were removed.

[vogie]

30 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

 

Paying to be a member was a pointless argument as a small percentage fall in GDP eliminates the "saving" ... it was a rounding error in the scheme of things. And we all know that £350 million per week is a lie ... why did they feel the need to lie?

 

Come on now, surely its not the first time a politician has lied, did you actually believe it, I certainly didn't believe one iota what Cameron and Osbourne had to say, if they had not tried to deceive the people, maybe it would have been a different result, and maybe the brexiteers are not as thick, stupid, xenophobic and racist as some of your bremoaners would have us believe?

[GuestHouse]

21 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Sadly, I think you may well be right that the brexit vote resulted in a few yobs thinking it a good reason to attack foreigners.

 

BUT - yobs have been attacking those they dislike for a long time - and the vast, vast majority of Brits. still wouldn't even dream of attacking foreigners.

 

I agree dd, but we need only read the sentiments expressed here on TVF to understand that attacks are the tip of the iceberg.

 

The racism and xenophobia that Brexit chose to place at the heart of their campaign plays with arguably the most dangerous forces in society.

 

 

[MissAndry]

7 minutes ago, GuestHouse said:

 

The racism and xenophobia that Brexit chose to place at the heart of their campaign plays with arguably the most dangerous forces in society.

 

I thought people from EU countries were generally the same race as Brits?

[AlexRich]

21 minutes ago, vogie said:

 

Come on now, surely its not the first time a politician has lied, did you actually believe it, I certainly didn't believe one iota what Cameron and Osbourne had to say, if they had not tried to deceive the people, maybe it would have been a different result, and maybe the brexiteers are not as thick, stupid, xenophobic and racist as some of your bremoaners would have us believe?

 

Did I believe it? No, but even if it were true compared to a $2.85 trillion US GDP in 2015 it was insignificant. The point is that it is a big number in the minds of many people ... so the reason it is used is to make people think they will be so much better off, or that a national treasure like the NHS will suddenly be fully funded. 

 

As for Cameron and Osborne, they were stupid ... but the idea that we'll suffer economically is most probably correct. 

 

Not all leavers are thick, racist and xenophobic, but most thick, racist and xenophobic Brits voted leave.

 

[AlexRich]

3 minutes ago, MissAndry said:

 

I thought people from EU countries were generally the same race as Brits?

 

Do you think that is how Romanian gypsies are viewed?

[dick dasterdly]

11 minutes ago, GuestHouse said:

 

I agree dd, but we need only read the sentiments expressed here on TVF to understand that attacks are the tip of the iceberg.

 

The racism and xenophobia that Brexit chose to place at the heart of their campaign plays with arguably the most dangerous forces in society.

 

 

As far as I can make out, those sentiments are largely directed towards the Moslem community?