[Politics] Brexit

[Baldseagull]

Now you are being an utter arse. They (leave) won the referendum, end, finale etc etc... I was angry, but that is what happened. Any other outcome other than the UK leaving the EU will set the UK back so far in terms of unity that it may never recover. Plus I want all the half wits who voted for it to see and feel the results of their stupidity.

Many of the halfwits have passed on now, not really fair to make the young suffer for silly old Grannies mistake.

 

[pastafarian]

Please can you link to this? I find that hard to believe as at the very least, surely these kind of wages are controlled by the minimum wage rate?

Indeed. Wages are not undercut in this instance as they are indeed controlled by the minimum wage.
What is being referred to is the post-referendum postal workers directive which previously allowed contracted workers to be posted overseas and made it possible to use deductions to make it attractive (not undercut wages, which were already covered by legislation concerning the host country being sent to).
The UK did not reject the legislation. Ireland, Croatia and the UK abstained.
In any case the legislation was still passed and all Member countries are required to adopt it into their own law by July 2020.
The main reason for us abstaining was that posted workers is not something high on the radar in the UK, we are at the very low end of its usage either way. Its not something that is relevant to the UK with regard to freedom of movement concerns.
It is a politically sensitive issue concerning the divide between eastern and western EU countries and a very big issue for countries like Germany, France, and Poland where usage of posted workers is very high .
In the UK, EU workers tend to be employed directly into the Labour market and not be posted workers from overseas.

 

[Baldseagull]

Brexit - a lunchtime conundrum

In an office there are 112 people. It is decided that they will all have a vote of what to have for lunch.
12 people are deliberately excluded from the vote because they are vegetarians, but will nevertheless have to put up with the lunch chosen and eat it.
52 people vote to get lunch from McDonalds. 48 people vote to get a bargain bucket from KFC.
It is therefore decided that lunch will be bought at McDonalds.

Of those 52, the motive to get lunch from McDonalds is based on the following wants of a meal;
- 15 want a Big Mac, fries and a Coke
- 10 want a Big Mac, fries and a milkshake
- 8 want a Filet o'Fish, fries & a Coke
- 7 want a Big Mac, salad and a Coke
- 7 want a Big Mac, salad and a milkshake
- 5 want a Filet o'Fish, salad and a Coke

15 people can therefore be said to want a Big Mac, fries & a coke from McDonalds for lunch. The other 97 people in the office do not want this. However they all now have to eat this lunch because to go against this would apparently be a betrayal of office democracy. This is in spite of the fact 12 are vegetarians, 14 cannot eat beef for religious reasons and 60 don't actually like Big Macs at all.

Worse than that, many of the 52 that said they wanted a McDonalds can't get their preferred meal option, they would actually rather have a bargain bucket from KFC instead.

 

[wellquickwoody]

I kind of understand your logic I really do Wellquick, trouble is if the country is f*cked over by their Brexit it won't only be them that will suffer will it? All who live here will get to suffer too if there is suffering to be had, of course you've decided to hightail it out of here and consequently will be personally shielded from any suffering to be had, lucky you! Just what have us remainers done that is so bad that you'd like to chuck us under the same bus that you'd like leavers to be under?

I saw the exchange rate plummet when Brexit happened, I did not escape unscathed I can tell you!

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Yes like the YouGov poll that gives PM Boris a 10 point lead over Labour this morning or the trend that shows the Tories in front in every poll since he was elected. Interesting to see if the Boris bounce will last.

Define 'have our cake and eat it' when this was said and by whom ... God, forbid you're just using one or two silly quotes then suggesting the whole referendum campaign was based on them.

Apologies for late reply; three days of family business.

Your announcement that the Leave campaign could only be charged with making a we-can-have-our-cake-and-eat-it claim when one of their spokesmen was actually recorded saying "We can have our cake and eat it" insults the intelligence of anyone with more than two brain cells. It's a generic term not just a literal one as everyone apart from you surely knows. Others have dealt your nonsense very well, but the example of a HOCAEI claim I would have quoted was the most famous claim of all. The £350m for the NHS assumed that we could stop paying that sum of money over to the EU and suffer not a single financial consequence as a result. Cummins magicked that the £350m (wrong in itself) was a net figure, not a gross one. No wonder he now lies at the heart of government.

And are you surprised there was a Boris bounce in the polls? The only surprise most people feel is that it wasn't bigger - even May had a better one. As you say though, it will be interesting to see how things progress.

 

[pastafarian]

It was indeed that simplistic. So we could leave the EU at 23.00 on 31/10, then rejoin the EU at 23.01 on the same night and the referendum mandate would have been wholly and utterly fulfilled.

I strongly support remainers falling back on this new tactic of actually leaving the European Union and then trying to rejoin it one minute later. It is a stroke of genius.

How will we leave? I won't charge you for the answer.

With a withdrawal agreement or without a withdrawal agreement, as provided by law, after notification of leaving has been given (also law) following a referendum (provided by law)which gave a decision to a question by majority vote. Did you not read Article 50 before you voted.

You have not been charged for this response.

Brexit - a lunchtime conundrum

In an office there are 112 people. It is decided that they will all have a vote of what to have for lunch.
12 people are deliberately excluded from the vote because they are vegetarians, but will nevertheless have to put up with the lunch chosen and eat it.
52 people vote to get lunch from McDonalds. 48 people vote to get a bargain bucket from KFC.
It is therefore decided that lunch will be bought at McDonalds.

Of those 52, the motive to get lunch from McDonalds is based on the following wants of a meal;
- 15 want a Big Mac, fries and a Coke
- 10 want a Big Mac, fries and a milkshake
- 8 want a Filet o'Fish, fries & a Coke
- 7 want a Big Mac, salad and a Coke
- 7 want a Big Mac, salad and a milkshake
- 5 want a Filet o'Fish, salad and a Coke

15 people can therefore be said to want a Big Mac, fries & a coke from McDonalds for lunch. The other 97 people in the office do not want this. However they all now have to eat this lunch because to go against this would apparently be a betrayal of office democracy. This is in spite of the fact 12 are vegetarians, 14 cannot eat beef for religious reasons and 60 don't actually like Big Macs at all.

Crikey. What sort of EU bureaucratically bogged down Utopian office is this where they must collectively vote to decide what they are permitted to have for lunch even if it is against the wishes of other office workers.

Whatever happened to the individual being allowed to skip the office directive on luncheon entirely and step out for lunch and decide on their own what they fancied to eat……or just skip lunch entirely because they had a big breakfast and were not really hungry anyway.

@RemainerNow on Twitter has 30.4K followers. People who have realised they were conned and lied to.

Approx. 66 million in the UK are not @remainernow followers.

I wonder how many of those 30k are people who voted leave but have now changed their mind (irrelevant) and how many followers are echo chamber cling-ons who were @remainersbefore anyway and are simply the types who were never going to accept the referendum result if remain ending up losing.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Approx. 66 million in the UK are not @remainernow followers.

I wonder how many of those 30k are people who voted leave but have now changed their mind (irrelevant) and how many followers are echo chamber cling-ons who were @remainersbefore anyway and are simply the types who were never going to accept the referendum result if remain ending up losing.

You don't need to wonder. They post about how they changed their minds & which lies they originally believed but subsequently found out we're deceptions.
It takes a lot to admit you got it wrong, but these brave people have.

 

[pastafarian]

You don't need to wonder. They post about how they changed their minds & which lies they originally believed but subsequently found out we're deceptions.
It takes a lot to admit you got it wrong, but these brave people have.

But i can wonder, i am allowed to.
With no evidence either way i will be free to suspect its mostly remainers like you who were remainers anyway and would not have accepted the given result of the referendum if they ended up on the losing side.

You have set a very low bar for what is considered bravery.

 

[melias shoes]

Clutching at straws again ,what is it about the word LEAVE that you don't understand ?
Regards
DR

He clutches those straws often.

 

[Baldseagull]

With a withdrawal agreement or without a withdrawal agreement, as provided by law, after notification of leaving has been given (also law) following a referendum (provided by law)which gave a decision to a question by majority vote. Did you not read Article 50 before you voted.

I did, it also says negotiations can be extended by agreement, and like the backstop, there is no limit to how long that extension could be, or how often it can be extended again.

But there are other laws that must be regarded too, such as the Withdrawal Act, which states ;

(2)Nothing in section 8, 9 or 23(1) or (6) of this Act authorises regulations which—

(a) diminish any form of North-South cooperation provided for by the Belfast Agreement (as defined by section 98 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998), or

(b) create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/section/10/enacted

 

[golddene]

I saw the exchange rate plummet when Brexit happened, I did not escape unscathed I can tell you!

I feel your pain Wellquick, that was the only plus side for me at that time ! A long story so won't bore you but sold £ for 140+ then managed to buy for 120 had I not panicked could have gained another £10k had I waited a day or two?

 

[B-right-on]

You don't need to wonder. They post about how they changed their minds & which lies they originally believed but subsequently found out we're deceptions.
It takes a lot to admit you got it wrong, but these brave people have.

And you believe them?

 

[golddene]

It wasn't for No Deal as the Leave Alliance published.
http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?bl...E_lD5fVvzqPSiwot0IDIxRStX7O4nE5w5b4H8cQq5ruTI

One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government should allow it. The option should be rejected.

Hate to say this TB but I think the most telling word in that quote is RESPONSIBLE the crew we have inherited from "the members" have an ignorance of responsibility unheard of in modern UK politics !

 

[B-right-on]

Brexit - a lunchtime conundrum

In an office there are 112 people. It is decided that they will all have a vote of what to have for lunch.
12 people are deliberately excluded from the vote because they are vegetarians, but will nevertheless have to put up with the lunch chosen and eat it.
52 people vote to get lunch from McDonalds. 48 people vote to get a bargain bucket from KFC.
It is therefore decided that lunch will be bought at McDonalds.

Of those 52, the motive to get lunch from McDonalds is based on the following wants of a meal;
- 15 want a Big Mac, fries and a Coke
- 10 want a Big Mac, fries and a milkshake
- 8 want a Filet o'Fish, fries & a Coke
- 7 want a Big Mac, salad and a Coke
- 7 want a Big Mac, salad and a milkshake
- 5 want a Filet o'Fish, salad and a Coke

15 people can therefore be said to want a Big Mac, fries & a coke from McDonalds for lunch. The other 97 people in the office do not want this. However they all now have to eat this lunch because to go against this would apparently be a betrayal of office democracy. This is in spite of the fact 12 are vegetarians, 14 cannot eat beef for religious reasons and 60 don't actually like Big Macs at all.

Every few weeks I go on this thread to see if it's improved and come out of it disappointed that people actually BELIEVE that that the whole LEAVE campaign can be brought down to a lunchtime argument over McDonald's or KFC.

What about when you go for the bargain bucket and suddenly realise that you have not only agreed to have lunch there today, tomorrow, next week, next year next century ad infinitum. You have no choice, thats it, you have to have it every day NO MATTER WHAT.

And when the bargain bucket cost doubles, triples, quadruples and increases exponentially by 100x and you are still contracted to get your daily bargain bucket.

The quantity of the chicken content gets less and less and the quality goes downhill but there's nothing you can do about it.

You find out that are subsidising feeding every indigent in the city who work less and less because you're paying for their own bargain bucket every day

Suddenly the freedom of choice at McDs today seems great because if you don't like it, well there's always Burger King, Domino's, Subway and thousands of others you can eat in afterwards because you have a choice of what and where you eat.

 

[pastafarian]

I did, it also says negotiations can be extended by agreement, and like the backstop, there is no limit to how long that extension could be, or how often it can be extended again.

But there are other laws that must be regarded too, such as the Withdrawal Act, which states ;

(2)Nothing in section 8, 9 or 23(1) or (6) of this Act authorises regulations which—

(a) diminish any form of North-South cooperation provided for by the Belfast Agreement (as defined by section 98 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998), or

(b) create or facilitate border arrangements between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland after exit day which feature physical infrastructure, including border posts, or checks and controls, that did not exist before exit day and are not in accordance with an agreement between the United Kingdom and the EU.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2018/16/section/10/enacted

Then you know, since you read it before you voted, that Article 50 provides for the treaties ceasing to apply and leaving with no withdrawal agreement.



I agree with you, the scope of the Withdrawal Act does not authorise regulations to be made that create or facilitate border arrangements when leaving under a withdrawal agreement exit or when leaving when there is no withdrawal agreement.

The Act simply takes us out of the EU on a given date, deal or no deal, repeals the European Communities Act, ends the supremacy of EU law and converts existing EU law into domestic law. The Act also allows domestic law to reflect the contents of any withdrawal agreement, (should there be one that is approved by Parliament) after we have left the EU.

If one would want to authorise regulations that created or facilitated border arrangements in Ireland after we have left the EU then the Withdrawal Act is not your friend in this regard, they would require separate acts of parliament and law.

 

[Icy Gull]

Travelling abroad this week has just got more expensive

From nudging 1.13 Euros to the pound before Boris became PM the Euro is now down to 1.08 which means you’ll be lucky to get 1.05 when exchanging. The dollar now down to 1.21

This is mostly down to Boris banging on about leaving with No Deal. Great timing as peak holiday season arrives.

Are NSC financial experts expecting this trend to continue...possibly to parity with the Euro?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

And you believe them?

More than I believe any politician.

 

[Tory Boy]

However if you are involved in the home based tourist trade its party time as more people from abroad will be able to afford to come here, and spend more money. Plus the fewer people holiday abroad the better for local tourism.

And if you are an exporter of goods it’s Xmas every day at the moment.

TB

 

[Rugrat]

However if you are involved in the home based tourist trade its party time as more people from abroad will be able to afford to come here, and spend more money. Plus the fewer people holiday abroad the better for local tourism.

And if you are an exporter of goods it’s Xmas every day at the moment.

TB

Yep ... we export tons of stuff

Propaganda machine alive and well

 

[Notters]

However if you are involved in the home based tourist trade its party time as more people from abroad will be able to afford to come here, and spend more money. Plus the fewer people holiday abroad the better for local tourism.

TB

More Brexiteer nonsense I'm afraid.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-tourism-idUKKCN1R60XN

Brexit is ****ing all of us.