[Politics] Brexit

[Dick Head]

Talks not going well in Brussels, unlikely to be any deal this week so the ditch will need to be dug

There are plenty of ditches all over the place already, unless you want a special ceremonial one dug.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

What's so difficult about trying to see things from someone elses perspective without calling them names and assuming that you are better than them? You have a different opinion, fair enough, but you are so full of hate, you aren't showing much (or any) sign of being intelligent, sensible or inclusive at all, sorry. You're just angry, rude, nasty, closed minded and prejudiced. I guess you think that because it's not someones race or sexuality that you are going after, it's totally fine, but actually it's not. You come across as everything you profess to hate, and nothing you profess to be.

Contempt.

And...back on ignore

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I suspect this thread will soon be taken down. But it will probably inform numerous sociology final year BSc dissertations. From where I am sitting I can see nobody in favour of leave with a cogent justification other than 'we voted for it so we must leave'. Remain does not have to explain itself any more than 'carry on living' needs to explain itself. Those who will call me a nimrod, traitor, denier of democracy, etc, can do one because I already have you (all 15 of you) on ignore.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

Earlier on today there was quite some fascinating posts from both sides, not the least those bemoaning the vitriol and hatred from both sides, and on occasion even a plea for compromise. Then you come along and always have to lower the tone. Why do you do it?

Oh dear.
Try to practice what you preach just a little bit harder tomorrow sonny Jim.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

50 years residence, a National Insurance number, a teachers pension, and a State pension, are not enough to get Settled Status. Apparently P60s are not enough proof.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/11/unsettled-status-for-eu-citizens

Time to go back home then
Regards
DF

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

I suspect this thread will soon be taken down. But it will probably inform numerous sociology final year BSc dissertations. From where I am sitting I can see nobody in favour of leave with a cogent justification other than 'we voted for it so we must leave'. Remain does not have to explain itself any more than 'carry on living' needs to explain itself. Those who will call me a nimrod, traitor, denier of democracy, etc, can do one because I already have you (all 15 of you) on ignore.

Need a cuddle H
regards
DF

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I want to clarify what you mean by more control of our Borders, is that literal, in the sense of turning people away at the border, or control of who can work in the UK legally?
When I talk to the blokes up my local, it was not workers they were bothered about, it was asylum seekers.
Quite a few were under the impression that because Germany had accepted a large number of Syrian refugees into their borders, that they would all be eligble to come and live and work here under EU freedom of movement. This is not the case and to be eligible to live and work in the UK under EU rules, they would first have to become German citizens. For people of refugee status in Germany, it takes 3 years before they can apply to get Permanent Resident Status, to achieve it they must be able to speak German to advanced level, be largely self sufficient and be able to accomodate themselves and any Family members. After 5 years, there is a reduction in the level of German Language skills required to attain Permanent Resident Status. This status does not allow freedom of movement to live and work in other EU states, to get that a refugee would have to have been there 8 years, and in addition to the previous language skills and ability to support themselves, will have to pass a Naturalisation test.
In 2018, 3 years after the peak of German refugees arrivals, 1800 applications from people of Refugee status were approved for Permanent Residency.

I admire your stamina for debating with the Prancing Ninny (long on my ignore list). Whataboutery, quoting nonexistant statistics, and then calling you a commie if you object are all part of his stock in trade. Sad, really, because I was thinking about voting leave before I realise the sort of sorry bedfellows I'd be lining up with.

 

[Dick Head]

Good to see mature posters avoiding childish insults

You smell.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Just as we can currently 'stroll into' 27 other European countries - an historic right and privilege Brexiteers are, it seems, happy to deny us all.

Apart from (arguably) controlling immigration and restricting our rights to emigrate, what changes are you looking forward to that we could not have made as members of the EU?

It seems to me that we have made or considered numerous enormous legal, constitutional and social changes (some positive, some not, depending on your socio-political point of view) during the past 40 plus years which the EEC/EU have had no influence on whatsoever and that we could continue to make such reforms as members of the EU. Apart from bendy banana style nonsense concocted by Boris Johnson and others or the possibility of significantly reducing our environmental, health, safety, social and labour rights - the real agenda of the Goves, Farage and Moggs - I really cannot see any post EU 'opportunities' we can look forward to or with which you can try to persuade those of us who do not crave greater controls on inward and outward migration.

An historic right ? Why do we need criminals from Romania , Albania taking the piss in this country
regards
DF

 

[dingodan]

I suspect this thread will soon be taken down. But it will probably inform numerous sociology final year BSc dissertations. From where I am sitting I can see nobody in favour of leave with a cogent justification other than 'we voted for it so we must leave'. Remain does not have to explain itself any more than 'carry on living' needs to explain itself. Those who will call me a nimrod, traitor, denier of democracy, etc, can do one because I already have you (all 15 of you) on ignore.

I won't call you any of those things. But you do seem to be a victim of confirmation bias.

People don't need to present an argument in favor of Brexit (although they have, plenty of times), requiring that implies that we still need to debate whether it should happen.

That debate was had, then we voted. Brexit won, so actually the argument that "leaving was the result" is actually the fairly obvious, and only relevent reason why it needs to be done.

"We should remain like we should carry on living", might be your opinion, but it isn't an opinion shared by everyone. What is so difficult about the concept that you are entitled to your view and others are entitled to their views. You are basically saying, "I am 100% correct, those who disagree with me are 100% wrong". That's likely what you believe, but that isn't an argument, and it's also confusing fact with opinion.

I respect your view that we should remain in the EU. Can you respect my view that we should leave the EU? Or is that just not possible for you?

 

[Dick Head]

An historic right ? Why do we need criminals from Romania , Albania taking the piss in this country
regards
DF

You do realise that our own homegrown criminals and hooligans will find it more difficult to take the piss abroad? Oh well, your loss.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

What's that expression -if you have nothing sensible to say, then it is better to say . . nothing

No, that's not the expression. Watch Bambi again, paying particular attention to Thumper.

 

[GrizzlingGammon]

An historic right ? Why do we need criminals from Romania , Albania taking the piss in this country
regards
DF

When we already have you in this country, taking the piss out of the system.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

Racist Sunday to be followed by super Saturday.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I suspect this thread will soon be taken down. But it will probably inform numerous sociology final year BSc dissertations. From where I am sitting I can see nobody in favour of leave with a cogent justification other than 'we voted for it so we must leave'. Remain does not have to explain itself any more than 'carry on living' needs to explain itself. Those who will call me a nimrod, traitor, denier of democracy, etc, can do one because I already have you (all 15 of you) on ignore.

I won't call you any of those things. But you do seem to be a victim of confirmation bias.

People don't need to present an argument in favor of Brexit (although they have, plenty of times), requiring that implies that we still need to debate whether it should happen.

That debate was had, then we voted. Brexit won, so actually the argument that "leaving was the result" is actually the fairly obvious, and only relevent reason why it needs to be done.

"We should remain like we should carry on living", might be your opinion, but it isn't an opinion shared by everyone. What is so difficult about the concept that you are entitled to your view and others are entitled to their views. You are basically saying, "I am 100% correct, those who disagree with me are 100% wrong". That's likely what you believe, but that isn't an argument, and it's also confusing fact with opinion.

I respect your view that we should remain in the EU. Can you respect my view that we should leave the EU? Or is that just not possible for you?

You could have saved yourself a lot of typing by simply agreeing with the original post that the only reason you have is 'we voted for it so we must leave'

 

[Bodian]

Can you respect my view that we should leave the EU? Or is that just not possible for you?

But that's the point I think. I get involved in 'disputes' all the time, and both sides can respect the views of the other side, whilst not necessarily agreeing with them - but this is all predicated on them understanding the other side's point of view. The trouble is here that Remainers can't, by and large, understand the Leavers' reasons for still wanting to leave (other than 'we voted for it') - and part of that is because none of the Leavers on here actually explain their reasons with simplicity or coherence.

 

[Hastings gull]

Good to see mature posters avoiding childish insults

Oh, please You silly little boy is hardly an insult and certainly not by his and your standards, don't lets forget.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

But that's the point I think. I get involved in 'disputes' all the time, and both sides can respect the views of the other side, whilst not necessarily agreeing with them - but this is all predicated on them understanding the other side's point of view. The trouble is here that Remainers can't, by and large, understand the Leavers' reasons for still wanting to leave (other than 'we voted for it') - and part of that is because none of the Leavers on here actually explain their reasons with simplicity or coherence.

It's easy.

The EFTA pillar of the EEA comes with sovereign consent for laws and regulations, whereas the EU pillar leaves us at the mercy of laws imposed by EU Qualified Majority Voting.

Sure, there are battles ahead to join EFTA, and then to opt for EEA access as now, however the eventual prize is a relationship with the EU like Switzerland - but we need to get the future deal right.

The deal we are talking now is the withdrawal arrangement - not the future relationship - and the politicians will eventually get it right on the future relationship ( although perhaps after a false start ).

We need to leave as step 1, though.

And *no deal* would be cataclysmic.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Oh, please You silly little boy is hardly an insult and certainly not by his and your standards, don't lets forget.

What makes you think that my comment was directed at you ?

And maybe you could show a post on this thread where I've been insulting

(And, what I have said about Ppf are statements of fact and could be defended in any court in the land)

 

[beorhthelm]

But that's the point I think. I get involved in 'disputes' all the time, and both sides can respect the views of the other side, whilst not necessarily agreeing with them - but this is all predicated on them understanding the other side's point of view. The trouble is here that Remainers can't, by and large, understand the Leavers' reasons for still wanting to leave (other than 'we voted for it') - and part of that is because none of the Leavers on here actually explain their reasons with simplicity or coherence.

i think the trouble is not recognising that for a large proportion of leave voters "we voted for it" is reason enough. the issue has become about the vote as much as subject of the vote.