|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2018 15:53:49 GMT
Post by patricklondon on Jul 9, 2018 15:53:49 GMT
What a relief that Boris Johnson has finally resigned! Why wasn't he sacked months ago? She didn't want to provoke any more trouble and a possible leadership challenge. That's now on the cards anyway, but he won't win.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2018 16:10:24 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Jul 9, 2018 16:10:24 GMT
I'm sure he is hoping to be the next PM, but I think that May could quite well call another election (sorry!) just to prevent that.
I have to admit (and this does not just concern UK politics) that I am totally disgusted by the number of millionaires/billionaires who have been elected in various countries just because they have so much money (to replace their brains?). When I look at people like Boris Johnson or Donald Trump, it is all I can do to not extend my disgust to blonds.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2018 18:06:29 GMT
Post by whatagain on Jul 9, 2018 18:06:29 GMT
I thought I was blond ... not a billionaire though.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 9, 2018 19:41:36 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Jul 9, 2018 19:41:36 GMT
Ha ha -- I did think of you when I mentioned "blond," but not as a politician.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 10, 2018 16:28:08 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Jul 10, 2018 16:28:08 GMT
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2018 7:42:43 GMT
Post by patricklondon on Jul 11, 2018 7:42:43 GMT
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2018 9:28:45 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Jul 11, 2018 9:28:45 GMT
Okay, okay, but if he could just retire from politics, that would be good...
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2018 10:54:08 GMT
via mobile
Post by whatagain on Jul 11, 2018 10:54:08 GMT
I am with a very good English friend tonight. Hope to understand the situation better before beer kicks in.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 11, 2018 17:53:23 GMT
Post by patricklondon on Jul 11, 2018 17:53:23 GMT
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 12, 2018 18:21:36 GMT
Post by cheerypeabrain on Jul 12, 2018 18:21:36 GMT
Crikey....
It was a shambles today in parliament, Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab tried to update the Commons on the government's new EU White Paper before the MPs had even seen it. John Bercow (the speaker) suspended proceedings for five minutes saying it was "most regrettable".
You couldn't make it up...
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 13, 2018 7:20:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by patricklondon on Jul 13, 2018 7:20:52 GMT
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 15, 2018 10:05:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by whatagain on Jul 15, 2018 10:05:47 GMT
Now it is clear. UK wants to leave Europe so that they can make an extended trade deal with US. Based on negotiations between nations of equal importance on good faith. With no protectionism as good capitalistic rules dictate. God saves Uk !
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 15, 2018 19:36:44 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Jul 15, 2018 19:36:44 GMT
Since Trump said that the EU, Russia and China are foes of the United States, does that make the United Kingdom a friend? Or just North Korea?
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 15, 2018 23:47:14 GMT
Post by questa on Jul 15, 2018 23:47:14 GMT
Something about the inmates in charge of the asylum is running around the back of mine....
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 16, 2018 6:08:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by mickthecactus on Jul 16, 2018 6:08:52 GMT
Absolutely. Not even a good enough breakfast for a dog.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 16, 2018 13:57:13 GMT
Post by questa on Jul 16, 2018 13:57:13 GMT
I would love to come back to Planet Earth in 100 years and see how the historians explain away this inept time. Many of the world's leaders have demonstrated that they have no ability for leading or making good decisions.
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 16, 2018 15:38:13 GMT
Post by mossie on Jul 16, 2018 15:38:13 GMT
I am becoming increasingly pissed off about our modern politicians. One cannot call them leaders, I wouldn’t trust them to lead an old horse, and no way let them loose near a brewery. Trump the Terrible is now flirting with Vlad the Merciless, who will come out best. No guesses please!
|
|
|
Brexit
Jul 16, 2018 20:58:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by whatagain on Jul 16, 2018 20:58:38 GMT
You'll have to like the French. But I heard some 'Mais l'anglais est fourbe'. English cannot be trusted. Fourbe is quite an old word and mostly disused. It has a ring of medieval tale...
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 16:32:13 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 29, 2018 16:32:13 GMT
This thread was started in February of 2016 and I am still waiting for the Leave people here to explain their positions. Earlier on, one of them cited the thing about the EU and the British fishing industry -- which is something that turned out to be a lie created by the Leave campaign. So now the clock is ticking and there is no cohesive plan or even a clear idea of what the future holds when the UK pulls away from the EU.
I ask again if any Leaver is willing to explain his/her position as it relates to solid evidence that the UK would be better out of the European Union.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 17:11:11 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 29, 2018 17:11:11 GMT
I ask again if any Remainer is willing to explain his/her position as it relates to solid evidence that the UK would be better staying in the European Union.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 17:14:24 GMT
Post by kerouac2 on Sept 29, 2018 17:14:24 GMT
Frankly, I do understand the gut sentiment of the leavers although the idea was sold on totally fallacious grounds. Who on earth would not like to think that their country is so brilliant and so noble that it can break away from the ridiculous bureaucracy and find a new path to success.
Several South American countries have tried this and failed in recent decades, and even France made a partial attempt in 1982 when François Mitterrand nationalised all of the banks as well as the steel industry and many other industrial groups such as Saint Gobain. Obviously the government would know how to protect national interests and prevent capitalist plunder. As you may have guessed, this did not work out in the end and things returned pretty much to normal after a few years. Unlike some of the Brexit arguments, I don't think that all that many lies were told, but there were a hell of a lot of illusions. I still fear that the United Kingdom is setting itself up for some big disappointments.
And obviously, the EU is not going to assist in any way, quite the contrary.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 17:29:08 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 29, 2018 17:29:08 GMT
Why would the EU assist, after all?
Since I am watching my own country on a similar voyage toward the rocks, similarly based on voting based on lies &/or deep-seated prejudices, I remain aghast at the UK's adherence to this disastrous course.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 17:51:22 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 29, 2018 17:51:22 GMT
Let me ask a question. What is the definition of "better"? Financially? Freedom? Law? Flexibility to react to changing markets? Morally? Corruption? Financial control?
A person who wishes us to remain can easily come up with concrete figures and projections - as the status quo will continue. The UK will continue as it has done for many years as a member of the EU - and thus that information is known. Leaving does not ally itself with certainties. A Leaver can only come up with projections, whether informed and accurate or not. So, comparing staying or leaving in terms of solid evidence and "better" is not something that can be done.
The term means a comparison between two things. How it is now as opposed to how it is inn the future. As one is for all practical purposes unknown, no remainer can say for sure we will be better off staying, they can only say what it will be like if we do stay. They cannot say what it will be like if we leave. They only have opinions, informed or not. Conversely, no leaver can say with accuracy, with figures or not, meaning hard evidence, that the UK will be "better" - off. Plus, how long is the future? Are we talking about in 5 years, 10 years, 50 years?
Both positions have so many benefits, it is undeniable that in the short term the UK will be financially worse off and no expert can accurately project/predict when the UK will pick its feet up and start running again. Hard evidence, i.e. facts and figures are only one part of the picture. Hard evidence that can be categorically proven is non-existent. Even if remaining, the hard evidence can only be given accurately for a short period of time, may at the most 5 years as the world situation can change quickly and there are too many unknown factors. What if we stay in and the financial institutions of London are subject to a scandal as with say, Enron? It would come out of the blue and could be devastating, whether we stayed or leaved.
I am of the opinion that those who did vote to leave had a number of factors influencing them - the term "better" is so subjective and personal that one person would say they things are better when leaving because we have more control over own own destiny. A remainer will say they are worse because we have to get a visa for France now. Hard reliable evidence either was in reality doesn't exist.
I challenge any remainer to come up with hard, accurate and reliable evidence that we will be better staying in the EU. It cannot be done because let's say if we stay we keep the EU market for our goods. The value of that could be calculated. But if we leave we lose the restrictions placed upon us as to which and what markets we can pursue. The value we could obtain from them is incalculable so it could easily be argued we will have more and larger markets for our goods putting the UK in a stronger position.
Staying will retain the factors we already have. Leaving opens up so many things, but does restrict us in other things. "Better" cannot be calculated coldly. The whole issue cannot be boiled down to facts and figures. There are too many emotional, subjective, intuitive, feel good factors that have no value except to the individual. These cannot be examined and a value put upon them.
"Better" for me means different things. It is not better if I have to get more visas to travel. It is not better if more restrictions are placed upon my pension or my UK finances. It is not better if when I go to the UK prices have gone up, nor if the exchange rate suffers so I get less for my money when abroad. It is not better if certain goods I could buy in the UK re no longer available. It is not better if things like the health service suffer because of, well, whatever.
My "better" relates to things such as intensely disliking being told, "You cannot do that" because it is against EU laws, regulations, policy or what reason they come up with. My "better" relates to the huge wastage of "our" money for the behemoth that is the EU HQ and related offices and services and fiefdoms. Yes, I admit, we do get some benefit probably from that, but ask the normal working man as to how the EU has directly benefited him/her and he/she will have to think about it for a minute before they can come up with something.
I could go on, but my "better" is not quantifiable and has a plethora of facets.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 18:01:08 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 29, 2018 18:01:08 GMT
"Frankly, I do understand the gut sentiment of the leavers....." Frankly I do not understand the gut sentiment of remainers. So we're even.
"Several South American countries have tried this and failed in recent decades...." Certainly there is a comparison between the UK and many South American countries. We are so alike in so many ways, aren't we? (Sarcasm alert).
"I still fear that the United Kingdom is setting itself up for some big disappointments." "I still am excited that the United Kingdom is setting itself up for some big (insert positive thing).
"Who on earth would not like to think that their country is so brilliant and so noble that it can break away from the ridiculous bureaucracy and find a new path to success." Condescension? At least you agree about the ridiculous bureaucracy.
"And obviously, the EU is not going to assist in any way, quite the contrary." Certainly they will be extremely miffed, overreact in a childish way and take their ball home. Wouldn't it be nice if they just agree to disagree and move on. But no, they'll hold it against for wishing to leave their exclusive club and take it all far too personally.
"I remain aghast at the UK's adherence to this disastrous course." Potentially. I remain aghast at the remainers adherence to staying in the EU. It is like safe room to some of them where they hope they'll be protected from the vagaries of the world, nothing nasty will be said to them or will happen to them because they have the big brother of the EU to protect them. Plus, more often than not, keep them in the dark, make deals behind their backs, be all political and often divisive and riddled with cadres, cliques, bullies etc. Everything that goes on in a large family, the fights, the allies, the favours, the secrets, goes on in the EU but with more consequences. The EU is just like a large family writ larger and more powerful, but the same things happen because there are humans involved, and too many humans at that.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 18:13:29 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 29, 2018 18:13:29 GMT
I suggest looking up what benefits the UK gets from the EU.
As far as Kerouac's comment about chauvinism ("...their country is so brilliant and so noble..." etc.), it in fact rather sums up why many people would vote for Trump or vote to leave the EU.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 19:28:02 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 29, 2018 19:28:02 GMT
"I suggest looking up what benefits the UK gets from the EU."
I failed miserably in making the point then that there are two parts to the picture. Tangible and intangible. Any list of benefits you mean would be based on the tangible - and yet each one can be argued as to the actual tangible value, the concrete value that is indisputable. Any of those 'facts' are the same as any fact in that field - it depends on your source of information, what the information is and taking into consideration anything that affects that fact. So in effect these tangible facts are open to interpretation. Nevertheless, they are there and undeniable, no matter how big or small they really are. I agree. These are what would supply you with your "solid evidence".
As I have said, there is no solid evidence in this regard about leaving. Only projections, opinions and estimates. I said, if you want these you wont get them, no matter how many times you ask. Anyone can tell you how much etc/whatever the UK will get in 2020 if we stay, a tangible fact and amount. No-one can say what will we get from something else in 2020 if we leave.
It seems many just cannot understand why many British would want to leave. There appear to be too many benefits to staying. I cannot understand how many cannot see past the concrete and tangible benefits and acknowledge that there is far more to the decision making process of an individual than this.
If someone has to make a small decision it is easy enough to balance, like a cost benefit analysis, the factors involved. Do I want to buy this expensive salami over the cheaper one? Can I afford it? Yes. Will I enjoy it more? Yes. Then it is bought. It is simple. The only factors involved are the one tangible - can I afford it - and the one intangible - how much enjoyment will I get out of it as compared to the cheaper version. How much more tasty is it?
The bigger the decision the more factors on both sides. Exponentially. An extremely big decision, like leaving/staying in the EU has on the tangible side far too many factors to keep in mind. It is easy to cherry pick depending on personal preference/relevance, but no matter what you might pick, someone else will have picked on other factors to persuade them and cannot understand why you didn't. If you ask remainers to whittle down why precisely they decided that way then individually one or two of the factors, tangible that is, will be spoken of. Some factors are more important than others to each person.
As said, there are countless tangible factors to staying, too many to know of or consider in making a decision, that is why people will home in on just a few to make it manageable and are relevant to them. However, this ignores the intangible - the emotional side. The emotional side that doesn't deal in facts. The subjective opinion, the influences from childhood, the identity of the person, what they relate to, agree on or disagree on. The character of the person. What they have lived through, their experiences that have formulated them. Their parents and their influence, where they live and their community, their friends, their enemies - everything that has moulded them to be the person they are, for good or bad.
It is often those that understand the inaccuracies of the 'facts'. These are not actually set in stone. What benefit is given now may not continue, they are more cynical by nature, less trusting of establishments, governments and authority. Generally more individualist and more independent in their thinking and actions. If the amount of facts are so great to be taken in and digested they will do what any person does at those times, when it is all overwhelming - they will base a decision on what they believe, what they feel, what they have experienced, what they intuit, what their 'gut' tells them - and don't decry gut feeling and intuition, they are part of who we are. All of us. Some will overcome that strength and dismiss it. They will base their decisions purely on facts. Well, good for you, but that isn't me, nor probably the 17,410,742 who did vote to leave. Just because a decision is based on those emotional factors, doesn't make it wrong.
If decisions were only ever based on facts it'd be far too easy, as has been seen on the supposed facts dragged out from the depths by both sides, to fool people because without emotional decisions, feeling what is right or wrong within you, it is pure and simple that no fact is a fact in these sorts of situations, so any decision purely based on them has its foundations in sand.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 19:39:17 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 29, 2018 19:39:17 GMT
this ignores the intangible - the emotional side. The emotional side that doesn't deal in facts. You mean the part that gives rise to prejudice and to inappropriate responses to situations? "Let's lynch that guy -- he looks guilty" kind of responses. True that a decision based on emotional factors doesn't make it wrong, but it's hardly a guarantee that it will be right.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 19:46:26 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 29, 2018 19:46:26 GMT
"As far as Kerouac's comment about chauvinism ("...their country is so brilliant and so noble..." etc.), it in fact rather sums up why many people would vote for Trump or vote to leave the EU."
Hence the conclusions I can draw from that is that those that voted to leave would vote for Trump. Those that voted to leave believe the UK is so brilliant and noble, without exception.
Broad inaccurate generalisations that leave me somewhat speechless. Fair enough Bixa, I understand you feel strongly, by proxy in a way as you are not directly involved or affected by the UK's decision. You just cannot understand from your physical and mental distance as to why leavers would vote that way. I get it, no problem. I've tried to explain my viewpoint. As I wish would happen with the EU rather than their obvious hurt that we don't want to be with them any more and they would just agree to disagree, make the divorce progress forward with alacrity and maturity, I will just have to agree to disagree with anyone who thinks those who voted to leave are foolish and other things they think about us. They appear to be too exasperated to see our viewpoint. All 17,410,742 of us.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 20:04:16 GMT
Post by onlyMark on Sept 29, 2018 20:04:16 GMT
"Let's lynch that guy -- he looks guilty" kind of responses. True that a decision based on emotional factors doesn't make it wrong, but it's hardly a guarantee that it will be right."
So you now liken our emotional opinion to that of a person who would lynch someone else. Somewhat extreme if that is an example of an emotional response and the depth of your emotional response to leavers. I can give you a million other emotional response examples that are 'good' rather than 'bad'. E.g. lets see if that woman is ok. She looks like she is having trouble with that man. An emotional, gut feeling, decision not based on anything consciously tangible. No emotional decision is guaranteed to be right. Conversely no factually based decision is guaranteed to be right either. Facts that may appear true now may not be in five minutes or five days or five years. Facts are the bane of our lives because, apart from gravity, death and taxes (to paraphrase), there are no certainties.
A fact for example is that the population of the world is 7.2 billion. By the time you read that sentence, no matter how short it is, the fact is no longer a fact. An opinion is that there are too many people in the world for the resources we have. That opinion is true now, tomorrow, next year and all the way until about 2130 when the world dies off because of our greed and stupidity unless Al Gore becomes world leader (god help us). That is the difference between facts and opinions.
Extreme fanatical opinions have no place in being compared to what the opinion is of the vast, vast majority who voted to leave. Granted you will get the extremists, but as you know, they are very few and far between and are in every society in the world.
|
|
|
Brexit
Sept 29, 2018 21:38:12 GMT
Post by bixaorellana on Sept 29, 2018 21:38:12 GMT
So many words, and still no solid explanation.
|
|