[Politics] Brexit

[Pretty pink fairy]

there's a nice little graphic in that article that shows 'where a no-deal Brexit would hit hardest'

it shows Germany would lose 102k jobs, China 59k, France 50k.....

….no mention of the UK though, Brexit Daily Express hiding facts?

We'll have to wait and see Bob
regards
DR

 

[The Clamp]

people voted brexit because we dont have a mythical utopia? maybe, but its funny that the unions it laments were anti-EU.

The unions were against British companies using cheap labour. The EU doesn’t decide what gangmasters pay their staff.

 

[theonlymikey]

I could also ask who is PPF Mikey
Regards
DR

So you're either talking to yourself or referring to yourself in third person? OK hun.

 

[Klaas]

Now post a picture of the bus .... which is what I referred to in my post.

Thought you'd be above this kind of pathetic semantic gaming. The message was clear.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Thought you'd be above this kind of pathetic semantic gaming. The message was clear.

Really!?

Why?

 

[Klaas]

Really!?

Why?

He comes across as alright on other threads but yeah, on here you're right. In the thrall of the brexit madness.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Thought you'd be above this kind of pathetic semantic gaming. The message was clear.

That's choice coming from you
Regards
DR

 

[Lever]

An explanation of why some people voted Brexit?

heterocephalusgabler.wordpress.com


Even people who weren’t alive then know, from their parents, that it was decent time to be starting out. You just have to ask about your dad’s free degree or the full-pay 2 year apprenticeship that led to his job for life; or look around the big family home your mum somehow managed to move into as the owner aged only 22. These things show, unequivocally, that things were – and still should be – better.
Like all economists, trade bodies, corporate leaders and non-UKIP or Tory politicians in the entire world, I think Brexit will make things worse. But I know those who chose it did so because they wanted change for the better. Change that looks like what the post-war period brought. They either remember it, or see it in their parents’ comparative comfort.
It was real. This is what it was like.

From the 40s through to the 80s, governments built up to 250,000 houses a year. They owned and defended major industries on our behalf, and the key strategy of any government was to have full employment and proper apprenticeships for anyone who wanted them.
Was that period perfect? Of course not. Bad things happened, poverty existed, governments screwed up, and there were wars and reversals and crises. But the general trend was for increased wealth, health, life expectancy, security, openness, home-ownership, saving, disposable income, social cohesion, and acceptance of others. In the years since the mid- to late-80s, to put it mildly, the pendulum swung back. Those gains – and for the vast majority of us, they were substantial gains – have juddered to a halt, stagnated, and then begin to slide inexorably back.

Prior to that, wages were high, growth was almost constant, unions ensured jobs were safe, education was free, productivity was strong, healthcare was well funded, and housing was cheap.

On the equivalent household income of £25,000 you could buy a house in London, own a car, and start a family. This is described neatly here.
Public pensions were secure and you retired at 60 or 65, a full 10 or 15 years earlier than young people will in future.
Personal debt was comparatively rare because – aside from mortgages – most things could be afforded on your wage. And mortgages were so cheap you could save a deposit for a London home – an actual 3 bed house of your own, not a cupboard to flatshare – in under 2 years.

Public debt was also low, and we kept it that way while managing to repay WW2 and build the NHS.

Government investment created the road system, publicly owned major industries, hospitals, postal and telephone services, public television, a power grid and a science and space programme. We even managed to introduce the Clean Air Act that started to protect the environment.
And at the same time, we gave away an empire but remained reasonably wealthy and powerful. And we managed to do this whilst accepting 1.4 million non-white (and, in large numbers, non-Christian) immigrants in the 1950s alone, and yet more in the 60s. Immigration – then, as now – didn’t destroy the economy, our traditions or our culture.
What did? Where did this utopia go? How did it all end?

Let me explain.
In that period the top rate of income tax was 95%: it’s now 45%. Business tax was 50%: it’s now 20%.
Since 1980, tax avoidance by the wealthy has doubled. Combined with those giant tax cuts, this means we now get 25% of what we used to from those who own the most.
Union membership was at 64% in the 70s. It’s now around 21%, and a mere 7% in the private sector. Every union in the world was, ultimately, formed by terrible employers. Now union power is gone, and guess what: the terrible employers are back.
And we used to own steel, water, car, electricity, gas, postal and other industries. Then, because it would somehow, magically “make things better”, we sold them to other countries. So now we send all that money overseas.
So what happened was this: every time you voted for smaller government and lower taxes, you voted to cut your income, pension, investment, and the availability of housing for your kids; and now you can’t afford to live well.
Every time you despised those on welfare and chose meaner, crueler leaders, you kicked away a piece of the framework on which your future happiness was built. And now your happiness is gone and you need someone to blame.
Every time you cursed the lefty BBC for charging £140 for TV and radio, you instead elected to give literally 6 times as much to Sky for showing exactly the same football matches you used to watch on terrestrial. And in doing so, you undermined the national in favour of the greedy.
Every time you turned your back on miners or shipbuilders or tube drivers who fought to save their jobs, you helped to destroy your protector; and now nobody sticks up for you.
Bulgarians didn’t do this. Jacques Delors didn’t. Muslims didn’t. The Labour Party didn’t. Jo Cox didn’t.
It’s true that the economy is big, and in pure numbers we’re the 7th richest country. But if one person has £200tn and everyone else has nothing, the country is still worth £200tn. Doesn’t mean the populace is wealthy.

Taking into account inequality and the enormous cost of living, we’re poorer than Equatorial Guinea. That wasn’t the case before we all decided it was good to be spiteful, greedy, short-termist idiots.

Behind Brexit lies this harsh fact: you’re a turkey who repeatedly voted for Christmas. You had multiple chances to vote for enlightened self-interest, and you blew it because you didn’t like how that funny-looking bloke ate a bacon sandwich.
I want to end this post with a brief diversion into 1970s metaphysics. Stick with me, it’s not gonna hurt.
The philosopher Robert M Persig argues that human thought can be divided into two types, which he calls Classic and Romantic.

A Classic person doesn’t care about the label you apply to something, only the function. Yes, the house is ugly, but who cares: it’s well-built and is just a box for sleeping in.
A Romantic person is not especially interested in function, mainly in form. The surface is the most important factor in assessing something – if the house is pretty, who cares if there’s rot in the basement.
There’s a natural “platform problem” here: whether you’re Classic or a Romantic, the platform you’re on means you will describe the other platform in disparaging terms. Romantics are “shallow and stupid”. Classics are “nerdy and elitist”. I’ve probably insulted half of you here, but doesn’t that kind of prove Persig’s hypothesis?
I’m a bit of a Classic, I think, and as such, I can’t help viewing Brexit as a function. It doesn’t matter what labels you apply to it. If you look below the surface at what you’re actually rejecting, rather than at what badge is applied to it, there’s a surprise in store.
I accept this doesn’t apply to everyone who voted Leave. Maybe only to a small minority. But given the narrowness of the vote, that percentage matters.

But in my Classic way, I can’t help concluding you didn’t vote to leave the EU at all, really. You only think you did. Given everything I’ve said about the yearning for what we used to be, everything we lost and want back, everything we blame on Europe without any justification, I have to conclude this:
In reality, you didn’t reject the dream of Europe we were all building.
You rejected the reality of a Britain you destroyed."

Compelling reading with some fine insights; I am sure your effort in writing this will not be lost on the majority of readers here. Thank you.

 

[DumLum]

How will the electronic customs work if we cannot have access to Galileo?

Surely you just need the internet? Do it all online.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Compelling reading with some fine insights; I am sure your effort in writing this will not be lost on the majority of readers here. Thank you.

A remainer telling leavers why they voted to leave who would have guessed YET people like yourself struggle to understand the 2016 referendum result
Rregards
DR

 

[Lever]

A remainer telling leavers why they voted to leave who would have guessed YET people like yourself struggle to understand the 2016 referendum result
Rregards
DR

Don't believe everything you think.

What does 'Rregards' mean Dumb Ranter?

 

[Grombleton]

A remainer telling leavers why they voted to leave who would have guessed YET people like yourself struggle to understand the 2016 referendum result
Rregards
DR

There's a difference between understanding something and falling blindly in line with it.

 

[Ernest]

[tweet] 1164540930764021761[/tweet]

 

[theonlymikey]

If anybody wants a laugh, read the comments section on the DM articles relating to brexit. Plenty off PPF types on there. Giggle.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

[tweet] 1164540930764021761[/tweet]

Now Johnson can't blame the EU.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

If anybody wants a laugh, read the comments section on the DM articles relating to brexit. Plenty off PPF types on there. Giggle.

You carry on laughing Mikey
regards
DR

 

[theonlymikey]

You carry on laughing Mikey
regards
DR

70 days until your face drops.

 

[WATFORD zero]

He comes across as alright on other threads but yeah, on here you're right. In the thrall of the brexit madness.

I don't think you could have summed it up more accurately.

[MENTION=1365]Westdene Seagull[/MENTION] is fine on other threads and I agree with lots of things he has said over the years but this thread is really strange.

He accepts that there isn't and never was a 'good deal' and the only deal available was a TM type deal with some sort of customs union (or backstop). He understands that no-one can give the faintest definition of what this 'good deal' that was sold by the Leave campaign actually consists of, and the reason for that is because it was a lie.

I believe that he also now accepts that 'no deal' is, as near as dammit, 'project fear'. I think that he also understands that ending free movement for EU citizens on day one of Brexit is impossible and that having no border in NI and allowing tariff free trade access to the world is an impossible situation from which to commence trade talks. As a result I think he now understands that 'no deal' is also a lie.

Now, obviously he is not a dribbling moron like [MENTION=11191]Pretty pink fairy[/MENTION] or [MENTION=2719]Mouldy Boots[/MENTION] , and nor is he easily confused and hopelessly naive like [MENTION=22389]bashlsdir[/MENTION].

He could, of course, simply say 'I still don't like the EU but can see that leaving at this time would not be of any benefit to Britain' but instead he continues to push a 'good deal' and 'no deal' as possible solutions despite these Leave campaign soundbites being shown to be complete and utter lies that are undefinable and unimplementable.

I really can't think of any other reason why a seemingly intelligent individual would try to push undefinable, unimplementable lies other than 'the thrall of the brexit madness' (or maybe he runs some serious investment funds )

*edit*

I've just thought. Supposing [MENTION=11191]Pretty pink fairy[/MENTION], [MENTION=2719]Mouldy Boots[/MENTION] , [MENTION=22389]bashlsdir[/MENTION] and [MENTION=1365]Westdene Seagull[/MENTION] turned out to be partners in a group responsible for some serious overseas investment funds. Some of us would look a bit silly then

 

[Dorset Seagull]

people voted brexit because we dont have a mythical utopia? maybe, but its funny that the unions it laments were anti-EU.

Much is said about what people had back then but don't have now. I seem to remember that credit cards didn't exist and people only bought things they could pay for. You weren't able to build up credit for things you wanted but couldn't afford

 

[WATFORD zero]

Much is said about what people had back then but don't have now. I seem to remember that credit cards didn't exist and people only bought things they could pay for. You weren't able to build up credit for things you wanted but couldn't afford

You used to have to save up to buy what you wanted, and if you couldn't save enough you couldn't have it, because you couldn't afford it.

Quite a healthy approach to consumerism, i'm sure you agree