[Politics] Brexit

[Jaxie]

I'll humor you and I'll assume you haven't heard. But I don't look forward to your (and others) response.

Most people who voted to leave did so for one simple reason.

They want the laws they have to live under to be made by the people they elect to office.

I have explained this in the past, but generally the response has been dismissive, that this is already the case, etc.

I would welcome someone acknowledging that, yes, in the EU we are subject to laws which are made not by the people we elect to office, and that this is something which they understand is a problem for many people, but they believe that it is a price worth paying for X,Y,Z benefits of being in the EU. That would at least be the start of an honest conversation. Hasn't happened yet, but I remain hopeful.

Ok mate, if we’re humouring each other lets start an honest conversation about those laws we have to live under. I can’t say they make my life significantly worse, which one do you look forward to doing away with? Workers rights? Clean beaches?

 

[dingodan]

Cheers! I don’t consider asking people for a reason leaving the EU will be a positive for me and my family, to be bullying. It’s incredible, I still haven’t been given one.

To be fair, I don't recall having this conversation with you before, but there has been plenty of bulling in this thread and generally in the public discourse towards people who voted leave.

You did mention that only a billionaire could want to leave the EU, it's not the worst thing I've been called, but it is still dismissive of the idea that there might be a sincerely held reason for wanting to leave.

I don't think I called you a bully either to be fair, but the approach by almost everyone has been to call me names, imply I am thick, crazy, bigoted++

The "bully" thing wasn't aimed at you personally, just what I have experienced in almost every conversation about this subject. No offense intended.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Most people who voted to leave did so for one simple reason.

To stop freedom of movement and to hell with the consequences?

I can’t just can’t believe that more than 7m people voted leave for the reasons you claim.

 

[Jaxie]

To be fair, I don't recall having this conversation with you before, but there has been plenty of bulling in this thread and generally in the public discourse towards people who voted leave.

You did mention that only a billionaire could want to leave the EU, it's not the worst thing I've been called, but it is still dismissive of the idea that there might be a sincerely held reason for wanting to leave.

I don't think I called you a bully either to be fair, but the approach by almost everyone has been to call me names, imply I am thick, crazy, bigoted++

The "bully" thing wasn't aimed at you personally, just what I have experienced in almost every conversation about this subject. No offense intended.

None taken, I certainly don’t intend to bully or offend anyone.

 

[dingodan]

Ok mate, if we’re humouring each other lets start an honest conversation about those laws we have to live under. I can’t say they make my life significantly worse, which one do you look forward to doing away with? Workers rights? Clean beaches?

You aren't really trying very hard, the start of your post raised my hopes, but then you get sarcastic. Do you think I want to get rid of workers rights? Do you think I hate clean beaches?

The principle is what is important. I have explained this so many times on here, but it never matters. But Ok, I want to be constructive so I'll do it again, but I have a feeling in 10-15 pages time it won't matter and I'll be asked again to explain myself.

The EU could have only 100% laws which I personally agree with. But that doesn't make it Ok that laws are not made by people I (or you) have the power to elect or remove. An EU which has laws I 100% agree with today, may have laws I don't agree with (or you don't agree with) tomorrow. Who makes the law is more important than what the law currently is.

I don't know what your personal politics are, but I want you to be able, if you elect a government, to determine what the laws in this country are, even if I don't personally agree with them. The point is that if the laws are not what you feel they should be, or what I feel they should be, we can debate, we can campaign, we can elect and through that we can decide. That is what I want. It is short sighted to say that the current laws of the EU are good and the current laws of the UK Government are bad. Tomorrow the UK Government might be your prefered choice, and the EU might be under the direction of people with whom you don't agree. Inside the EU you won't be able to change the laws made by people who don't share your values, even if you have the UK government of your choice.

It's not about this or that law, and it shouldn't be about the makeup of the current EU or UK governments. It is only about whether our elected officials decide our laws or not. And it is important that they do.

 

[birthofanorange]

Another referendum would be just as bad.

Re-opening the wound and pouring in gallons more poison.

And if Remain then won it by a thin majority, then Farage will be heading for the level of power and influence that this country really doesn't need.

The wound has never closed in the first place, and Farridge won't last - he's a twunt, and most people realise that.

 

[birthofanorange]

" A lot of shit " is an understatement.
We are fast approaching a period of social unrest in this country, not experienced for centuries. The mood out there is ugly and divisive. This atmosphere will worsen and degenerate and manifest itself in civil strife.

Balls.

A few rampant Leavers will stamp their feet etc,. but the fact of the matter is that life will go on as it was, before all this crap started and most people will go back to not giving two hoots about being in the EU, just as most people didn't before the damn referendum happened.

Civil strife my arse.

 

[Mellotron]

Nothing could better illustrate the fact that there is NO one Brexit than the fact the head of the Leave campaign and the head of Leave.EU are at complete loggerheads at this stage in proceedings.

We have no idea which Brexit you want. Pick one, and see if it has a majority.

 

[dingodan]

[tweet]1185659559941230592[/tweet]

 

[birthofanorange]

"why can’t we talk about actual, tangible benefits/consequences to Leaving/Remaining." - We have, and then we voted, and leave won.
.

Yes, *some* people voted to Leave based on the Leave campaign - ie. With a good deal. Have we had that offered yet? Nope. So what exactly are these tangible benefits of Leaving that have been tabled?
The consequences of Leaving were dismissed purely as Project Fear, yet there is a plethora of experts in many fields which agree that it will not in any way be beneficial to the country.
It needs another referendum to put this to bed - in either direction - and it needs to be less simplistic than the previous one.
It's the democratic thing to do, at this stage.

 

[Mellotron]

[tweet]1185659559941230592[/tweet]

Yeah, Jo Cox was murdered.

 

[The Camel]

[tweet]1185659559941230592[/tweet]

A Labour Remain-supporting MP was murdered.

Even though John Mann is clearly a sensitive snowflake, I'm sure he'll get over a few nasty words.

 

[wellquickwoody]

There was a fairly good chunk of the electorate walking round the streets of London today wearing a lot of blue and yellow, and it wasn't a demonstration in favour of IKEA. There are large numbers of people opposing what BoJo wants to do.

The referendum was not about who could get the most number of people whining and walking around central London. It was about getting a majority of those bothered to cast their vote to express a Leave or Remain opinion. The rest is history as they say.

 

[Stat Brother]

You aren't really trying very hard, the start of your post raised my hopes, but then you get sarcastic. Do you think I want to get rid of workers rights? Do you think I hate clean beaches?

The principle is what is important. I have explained this so many times on here, but it never matters. But Ok, I want to be constructive so I'll do it again, but I have a feeling in 10-15 pages time it won't matter and I'll be asked again to explain myself.

The EU could have only 100% laws which I personally agree with. But that doesn't make it Ok that laws are not made by people I (or you) have the power to elect or remove. An EU which has laws I 100% agree with today, may have laws I don't agree with (or you don't agree with) tomorrow. Who makes the law is more important than what the law currently is.

I don't know what your personal politics are, but I want you to be able, if you elect a government, to determine what the laws in this country are, even if I don't personally agree with them. The point is that if the laws are not what you feel they should be, or what I feel they should be, we can debate, we can campaign, we can elect and through that we can decide. That is what I want. It is short sighted to say that the current laws of the EU are good and the current laws of the UK Government are bad. Tomorrow the UK Government might be your prefered choice, and the EU might be under the direction of people with whom you don't agree. Inside the EU you won't be able to change the laws made by people who don't share your values, even if you have the UK government of your choice.

It's not about this or that law, and it shouldn't be about the makeup of the current EU or UK governments. It is only about whether our elected officials decide our laws or not. And it is important that they do.

Through this process I've been surprised by the amount of EU 'laws' and directives the UK has opted out of or has taken on board but then enhanced.

Actually I guess surprised isn't the word I'm looking for, because I had no knowledge in the first place.

AFTER the Leave vote I've learned an awful lot about the EU and how the UK works with them, on the whole I've been really impressed.

I voted Remain for reasons not worthy of this sensible reply (but more justifiable now than I ever glibly thought at the time) I wish the campaigning to Remain was adequate enough for me to have voted to Remain because it was the right thing to do.

 

[Chicken Run]

Balls.

A few rampant remainers will stamp their feet etc,. but the fact of the matter is that life will go on as it was, before all this crap started and most people will go back to not giving two hoots about leaving the EU, just as most people didn't care about being in it before the damn referendum happened.

Civil strife my arse.

Edited for, same either way!

 

[Stat Brother]

I understand the argument around 'sovereignty' and 'one nation one law' but I don't think they hold up.

To me they sound like they come from a section of the country that has spent 40 years looking at front page headlines concerning 'straight bananas', 'ban selling eggs by the dozen' 'Up Yours Delores' - the list is endless (a rather depressing Google search) instead of embracing the club we asked to join, then almost instantly opted out of x, y, & z.

We've allowed our thinking to be formed by the tabloid press, which then becomes a news story, which then has to be balanced, who have fed us what we want Little Englanders, Fighting the Enemy, Saving Europe, WWII.

It's a shame the UK has never been allowed to appreciate the positives from the EU, although not surprising as it's all incredibly boring, dry and going on in the background ever so slowly making the UK a better place.

 

[ManOfSussex]

I'm wide awake at 5am, but my newsagent doesn't open until 7am, so The Sunday Times is almost a 2 hour agonising wait away for the full analysis of yesterday. (and I for one am glad that once Brexit is done and dusted, the political correctness gone mad of EU freedom of movement is ended and we'll have less people of Pakistani heritage round here like him like the 17.4 million people voted for.)

Having not seen the front pages of today's papers yet and not wishing to go full on 'Oz Clarke and Jilly Goolden' so early in a morning, but I'm definitely detecting a hint of a bombois of Gammon outrage c'est matin. It's certainly in the air. It's a full bodied Tory one, but the subtle hint of Farage gives it the body, I feel. It's lively and I think the second glass could surprise you from the first.............

 

[Hampster Gull]

I understand the argument around 'sovereignty' and 'one nation one law' but I don't think they hold up.

To me they sound like they come from a section of the country that has spent 40 years looking at front page headlines concerning 'straight bananas', 'ban selling eggs by the dozen' 'Up Yours Delores' - the list is endless (a rather depressing Google search) instead of embracing the club we asked to join, then almost instantly opted out of x, y, & z.

We've allowed our thinking to be formed by the tabloid press, which then becomes a news story, which then has to be balanced, who have fed us what we want Little Englanders, Fighting the Enemy, Saving Europe, WWII.

It's a shame the UK has never been allowed to appreciate the positives from the EU, although not surprising as it's all incredibly boring, dry and going on in the background ever so slowly making the UK a better place.

Excellent post SB.

And Boris was one of the journalist peddling the “fake news” to get a pay check and to poison many peoples opinions

 

[Jaxie]

You aren't really trying very hard, the start of your post raised my hopes, but then you get sarcastic. Do you think I want to get rid of workers rights? Do you think I hate clean beaches?

The principle is what is important. I have explained this so many times on here, but it never matters. But Ok, I want to be constructive so I'll do it again, but I have a feeling in 10-15 pages time it won't matter and I'll be asked again to explain myself.

The EU could have only 100% laws which I personally agree with. But that doesn't make it Ok that laws are not made by people I (or you) have the power to elect or remove. An EU which has laws I 100% agree with today, may have laws I don't agree with (or you don't agree with) tomorrow. Who makes the law is more important than what the law currently is.

I don't know what your personal politics are, but I want you to be able, if you elect a government, to determine what the laws in this country are, even if I don't personally agree with them. The point is that if the laws are not what you feel they should be, or what I feel they should be, we can debate, we can campaign, we can elect and through that we can decide. That is what I want. It is short sighted to say that the current laws of the EU are good and the current laws of the UK Government are bad. Tomorrow the UK Government might be your prefered choice, and the EU might be under the direction of people with whom you don't agree. Inside the EU you won't be able to change the laws made by people who don't share your values, even if you have the UK government of your choice.

It's not about this or that law, and it shouldn't be about the makeup of the current EU or UK governments. It is only about whether our elected officials decide our laws or not. And it is important that they do.

Sorry if I appeared sarcastic. That wasn’t intentional, though reading back I can see how I could have come across that way. But I can’t accept the argument that EU lawmakers/ leaders are unelected. We’ve only just had elections for MEPs to represent us. How much more Democrat could it be?

 

[Guinness Boy]

The EU could have only 100% laws which I personally agree with. But that doesn't make it Ok that laws are not made by people I (or you) have the power to elect or remove. An EU which has laws I 100% agree with today, may have laws I don't agree with (or you don't agree with) tomorrow. Who makes the law is more important than what the law currently is.

I don't know what your personal politics are, but I want you to be able, if you elect a government, to determine what the laws in this country are, even if I don't personally agree with them. The point is that if the laws are not what you feel they should be, or what I feel they should be, we can debate, we can campaign, we can elect and through that we can decide. That is what I want. It is short sighted to say that the current laws of the EU are good and the current laws of the UK Government are bad. Tomorrow the UK Government might be your prefered choice, and the EU might be under the direction of people with whom you don't agree. Inside the EU you won't be able to change the laws made by people who don't share your values, even if you have the UK government of your choice.

It's not about this or that law, and it shouldn't be about the makeup of the current EU or UK governments. It is only about whether our elected officials decide our laws or not. And it is important that they do.

MEPs are elected. The House of Lords isn't. And our MPs are currently blocking Brexit.