[Politics] Brexit

[WATFORD zero]

He is a politician.They all talk shite....endlessly. They rely on the gullible and the apathetic. They put forward their party manifesto's and none of it gets acted on, even though people believe them and vote on them. They make promises and don't deliver. They switch political allegiance at the drop of a hat, to suit their own personal agenda and expect their constituents to go along with it. They have been caught cheating and deceiving and carry on as if nothing has happened.
Everyone in the political establishment has an agenda and will lie and deceive to get that message across. Its obvious from a lot of the dialogue on this thread that many of you fail to see through the bovine manure. I don't know whether its ignorance or naivety or simply that some of you are easily led. You seem to believe every drop of spin that is spun in your direction. We have had three and a half years of deception from the political establishment and a lot of you on here have fallen for it, hook, line and sinker. I know no one who believed in a slogan on a bus. I know no one who believed the former PM, an arch political establishment figure, who claimed to be working towards a clean break from the EU. I know no one who believes that politicians can be trusted.
They claim to represent the people and work in their local surgeries, listening to micro issues that have little or no effect on the wider picture. They don't listen to business and what business needs. They are pawns, moved up and down by the people with real influence.
Yes, Boris talks shite but so do all the others.

Oh good, your'e back to help out us naive, gullible, apathetic, ignorant and easily led.

Just like your last post on this thread was so informative on how little effect 'no deal' would have

1) The UK's temporary tariff regime means that 88% of total imports to the UK, by value, will be eligible for tariff free access.

2) British businesses will not pay tariffs on imports into the UK, for the majority of goods, if we leave without an agreement.

3) An exceptional review process will come into force on exit day, to make changes to the temporary tariff regime, if necessary.

4) The temporary tariff regime is in force for 12 months, whilst a full consultation on a permanent approach to tariffs is undertaken from January.

The temporary tariff regime is far reaching and needs to be studied. Some products will fall quite a lot in price, others will rise. No one can state categorically that we are ****ed until you are able to analyse all the changes and they won't be clearer until post Brexit, let alone the changes to UK taxation legislation, which will take a time to be established.

1) The tariff free 88% of total imports to the UK by value will be tariff free to the Whole world under WTO Most favoured nation rules undercutting all British businesses in those markets

2) Of course British businesses will not pay tariffs on imports to the UK. They will, however pay export tariffs on all goods that are currently tariff free to the EU and will also lose all EU trade agreements for exports to the rest of the world

3) & 4) Given the above any temporary changes etc are completely meaningless

I always feel so much better informed following your posts

 

[The Clamp]

I see Boris has broken another promise today. Revealed , that despite his promises, government will not be passing legislation to ensure that British soldiers cannot be pursued and prosecuted for alleged crimes during the NI troubles.

That’s gonna confuse his fans. Doesn’t sound very Churchillian does it. Mind you, his supporters are dimmer than the bottom of the Mariana Trench so it probably won’t bother them.

 

[WATFORD zero]

When will people realise Boris gives zero ****s about brexit?

He is going to say and do what ever - sadly for him all sides are now boxing him in, just like May

Nobody is boxing anyone in. From the day after the referendum there have only ever been the same three options.

This is from over 2 years ago

I really can't see anything beyond the three options

1/ Soft Brexit with No borders and regulatory alignment

2/ No agreement with WTO and hard border

3/ Withdraw article 50

Shirley, any negotiation now will only be minor fine-tuning on one of the above

Nothing has changed. The only thing that has happened is it has become blindingly obvious that there is not a significant majority for any one of them. Despite all the that has been forthcoming in Parliament, in the media and on NSC over the last 3.5 years, this is the exact same problem that has been there since the day after the referendum.

Now, I wonder what could be done to resolve it

 

[dingodan]

Doesn't affect me thankfully but that is the point. I can watch this as a bystander.

I've just witnessed a few months of bravado but then the Government roll over and let the EU sniff it's genitals.

Fair play to you, one of the last standing "technical" defenders of the approach on here until the death. Your comrades have long disappeared, allowing the front line to be manned by an ex-pub Landlord and collectors of second world war memorabilia.

I even thought the EU over the last few months should really try and compromise so we can find a deal. No need.

Our PM in panic has reached into the bottom of his waste paper bin, moved aside the sticky soiled sheets of Andrex "compiled" during a Google Hangouts fact finding trip and found Theresa May's plan zero.

Yeah this kind of approach seems to be the general attitude.

Be as mocking as you possibly can, you hate the fact that there might be a deal, and your best hope is that people who want to leave will hate it, you can help by making it sound like bending over and lubing up for the EU.

Good luck, you didn't understand people who wanted to leave 3 years ago, and you don't understand them now.

The reason, by the way, that they have all "long disappeared" on here is because this hasn't been much of a place for civil intelligent discourse. It's been a place filled mostly with hate and prejudice. Your interpretation that they have all "run away" because you've "won" the argument is a bit sad when you consider the real reasons.

 

[Hastings gull]

Yeah this kind of approach seems to be the general attitude.

Be as mocking as you possibly can, you hate the fact that there might be a deal, and your best hope is that people who want to leave will hate it, you can help by making it sound like bending over and lubing up for the EU.

Good luck, you didn't understand people who wanted to leave 3 years ago, and you don't understand them now.

The reason, by the way, that they have all "long disappeared" on here is because this hasn't been much of a place for civil intelligent discourse. It's been a place filled mostly with hate and prejudice. Your interpretation that they have all "run away" because you've "won" the argument is a bit sad when you consider the real reasons.

Sad truth, I regret to say -is it any wonder that reaching a compromise is so hard, when the powers-that-be are egged on by those who have no intention of giving an inch., and are utterly convinced that only their vision is the one that counts, doing their utmost to denigrate others in the process.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Sad truth, I regret to say -is it any wonder that reaching a compromise is so hard, when the powers-that-be are egged on by those who have no intention of giving an inch., and are utterly convinced that only their vision is the one that counts, doing their utmost to denigrate others in the process.

Well the problem is that the electorate were fairly evenly split in 2016 between Leave and Remain, diametrically opposed positions.

I genuinely can't see what the compromise is between the positions of Leave and Remain, by their very definition

*edit*

In fact, didn't you call me an 'extremist' last night, because I wanted the various detailed options put back to the electorate and didn't want your favoured Leave option enforced on the country ?

 

[birthofanorange]

Maybe you would. But if leave won again we are back where we started, and if remain were to win, a) nobody on the leave side will ever believe you would have accepted a lose outcome, you won't be able to prove that, the only evidence will be said to be that you didn't accept the vote you lost, just the vote you won, and b) nobody on the leave side will accept the result of this vote, on the basis that "why should they when their win was ignored?".

A second vote would either make no difference or start a fight which would never end.

Of course Leave would win again, after all, it's still the 'Will of the people', isn't it?

Maybe we really should find out.

 

[dingodan]

Of course Leave would win again, after all, it's still the 'Will of the people', isn't it?

Maybe we really should find out.

Ok, let's have another vote.

I'll let you know if it counts once the results are in.

 

[birthofanorange]

Ok, let's have another vote.

I'll let you know if it counts once the results are in.

It'll count far more than the original, binary, emotive and generally ill-informed one, of 2016.
Of course, that's probably what troubles you.

 

[Chicken Run]

It'll count far more than the original, binary, emotive and generally ill-informed one, of 2016.
Of course, that's probably what troubles you.

What troubles me is that this type of view is based on the cluster **** that has been the exit process created by Parliament where there are many MP’s who didn’t like the result and have disrupted the exit at all cost, we haven’t actually left so noone knows what a true life without membership is like.

 

[dingodan]

It'll count far more than the original, binary, emotive and generally ill-informed one, of 2016.
Of course, that's probably what troubles you.

No, what troubles me is saying "this one doesn't count, let's do it again, this one will count". It undermines the integrity of the process, you must see that. I can only assume you are so opposed to Brexit and so convinced that a second vote would result in a remain win that it's all you care about, even to the point of sacraficing faith in voting completely.

Not to mention that if leave won, which I personally think it would, we would be back where we started, and if remain won, what would be your argument in favor of actually respecting that vote? Leave voters would just say, we are better informed about the EU now (as soon as the slightest thing changes or evolves in the EU), time for another vote. What would you say? respect the result? Why would people accept that argument? That's the danger in what you are doing. Calling into question the basic principle that the result of a vote should be respected. That won't end with this vote, it will never end, and nobody will ever accept any vote they lose ever again. That would not be a good thing.

Don't be so short sighted.

 

[birthofanorange]

What troubles me is that this type of view is based on the cluster **** that has been the exit process created by Parliament where there are many MP’s who didn’t like the result and have disrupted the exit at all cost, we haven’t actually left so noone knows what a true life without membership is like.

No, it's based on the fact the most people (and I include myself, here) had very little idea of the pros and cons of leaving or remaining, but 3.5 years of reading, listening and learning may have made some people re-assess their decision made at the time.

It's reasonable to find out if that's the case, is it not?

 

[dingodan]

No, it's based on the fact the most people (and I include myself, here) had very little idea of the pros and cons of leaving or remaining, but 3.5 years of reading, listening and learning may have made some people re-assess their decision made at the time.

It's reasonable to find out if that's the case, is it not?

I'm not sure many would agree with you that they "had little idea of the pros and cons". But if you feel that way personally, fair enough.

The moral of the story is simple.

Educate yourself properly before you vote next time.

 

[birthofanorange]

No, what troubles me is saying "this one doesn't count, let's do it again, this one will count". It undermines the integrity of the process, you must see that. I can only assume you are so opposed to Brexit and so convinced that a second vote would result in a remain win that it's all you care about, even to the point of sacraficing faith in voting completely.

Not to mention that if leave won, which I personally think it would, we would be back where we started, and if remain won, what would be your argument in favor of actually respecting that vote? Leave voters would just say, we are better informed about the EU now (as soon as the slightest thing changes or evolves in the EU), time for another vote. What would you say? respect the result? Why would people accept that argument? That's the danger in what you are doing. Calling into question the basic principle that the result of a vote should be respected. That won't end with this vote, it will never end, and nobody will ever accept any vote they lose ever again. That would not be a good thing.

Don't be so short sighted.

It's nothing to do with not liking the result, (although I clearly do not), but it still remains true that some - possibly a lot - who knows, may have changed their minds, after 3.5 years.
Surely we need to know if it still really is what people want?
Seems very democratic, to me.

 

[birthofanorange]

I'm not sure many would agree with you that they "had little idea of the pros and cons". But if you feel that way personally, fair enough.

The moral of the story is simple.

Educate yourself properly before you vote next time.

Quite, and 3.5 years of 'educating' may have changed some minds.

Let's find out, eh?

 

[maltaseagull]

He is a politician.They all talk shite....endlessly. They rely on the gullible and the apathetic. They put forward their party manifesto's and none of it gets acted on, even though people believe them and vote on them. They make promises and don't deliver. They switch political allegiance at the drop of a hat, to suit their own personal agenda and expect their constituents to go along with it. They have been caught cheating and deceiving and carry on as if nothing has happened.
Everyone in the political establishment has an agenda and will lie and deceive to get that message across. Its obvious from a lot of the dialogue on this thread that many of you fail to see through the bovine manure. I don't know whether its ignorance or naivety or simply that some of you are easily led. You seem to believe every drop of spin that is spun in your direction. We have had three and a half years of deception from the political establishment and a lot of you on here have fallen for it, hook, line and sinker. I know no one who believed in a slogan on a bus. I know no one who believed the former PM, an arch political establishment figure, who claimed to be working towards a clean break from the EU. I know no one who believes that politicians can be trusted.
They claim to represent the people and work in their local surgeries, listening to micro issues that have little or no effect on the wider picture. They don't listen to business and what business needs. They are pawns, moved up and down by the people with real influence.
Yes, Boris talks shite but so do all the others.

Perhaps you should run the country for us idiots?

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Yeah this kind of approach seems to be the general attitude.

Be as mocking as you possibly can, you hate the fact that there might be a deal, and your best hope is that people who want to leave will hate it, you can help by making it sound like bending over and lubing up for the EU.

Good luck, you didn't understand people who wanted to leave 3 years ago, and you don't understand them now.

The reason, by the way, that they have all "long disappeared" on here is because this hasn't been much of a place for civil intelligent discourse. It's been a place filled mostly with hate and prejudice. Your interpretation that they have all "run away" because you've "won" the argument is a bit sad when you consider the real reasons.

My take on it would be that the people avoiding the civil intelligent discourse are the leavers.

I raised a similar question a couple of days ago on another forum and actually received a full and cogent answer from someone other than the person I was responding to as to their reasons. I didn't agree with him, or it would not have changed my own mind, but it was reasoned and none of it repeated the more obvious lies from the campaign.

It made a change from some of the combative vitriol that comes out on here.

 

[Chicken Run]

No, it's based on the fact the most people (and I include myself, here) had very little idea of the pros and cons of leaving or remaining, but 3.5 years of reading, listening and learning may have made some people re-assess their decision made at the time.

It's reasonable to find out if that's the case, is it not?

What are the to B’s in the above text ? Edit I see you’ve removed them , very sneaky.

3.5 years of reading what both sides have put out there, we haven’t left so BOTH sides of the argument are purely conjecture no?

 

[birthofanorange]

What are the to B’s in the above text ? Edit I see you’ve removed them , very sneaky.

3.5 years of reading what both sides have put out there, we haven’t left so BOTH sides of the argument are purely conjecture no?

"To B's"?

 

[dingodan]

Quite, and 3.5 years of 'educating' may have changed some minds.

Let's find out, eh?

Next vote will be something like 2055.

Gives you plenty of reading time.