Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

10000maniacs · 07-12-2018 01:32AM

Scoondal wrote: »

Leave means leave. Simply, no lies, no trickery, the votes were counted.
NEWS : UK voted to LEAVE EU.
Do you live in a cave ?

They may as well have voted for more Pyrenean ibex's. Your argument is grand if you can define Brexit.

Peregrinus · 07-12-2018 04:46AM

Shelga wrote: »

I’m not saying it would be good, just asking the question, as I struggle to see even a tiny single advantage of this fiasco.

There's basically no economic advantage to Brexit. All models of Brexit are economically harmful to the UK; the only dispute is by how much.

To value Brexit, you have to assign significance to non-economic factors like not being committed to "ever closer union", not having to afford freedom of movement to EU citizens, not being subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Folkstonian · 07-12-2018 04:52AM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Any Irish person who thinks that leave is a good idea is either batsh*t insane or trolling.

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Folkstonian · 07-12-2018 05:04AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

There's basically no economic advantage to Brexit. All models of Brexit are economically harmful to the UK; the only dispute is by how much.

To value Brexit, you have to assign significance to non-economic factors like not being committed to "ever closer union", not having to afford freedom of movement to EU citizens, not being subject to the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

Peregrinus · 07-12-2018 05:27AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

Ah, but oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive etc etc.

The problem here is that Brexiters sold the idea of Brexit by representing it as having economic advantages - budgetary savings through not having to contribute to the EU, wonderful new trade deals with China, North Korea and countries yet to be discovered under the seas, etc, etc. Even with all that puffery, they just got it over the line in the referendum.

It's now very difficult for them to turn around and say, actually, no; none of that is going to happen. Quite the reverse, in fact. But there will be benefits; just intangible benefits which are quite different from the material benefits that you expected when you actually voted for this.

Instead, they try to do this indirectly by asserting that this is what the people were voting for all along - asserting that, although promised an economically advantageous Brexit, they voted for an economically damaging Brexit, motivated by other considerations to accept the economic damage as a price worth paying to secure the intangible but important blessings of sovereignty.

But, quite frankly, that's not true.

In a sense, both sides of this debate have the same problem. Leavers failed to build a case for the values of sovereignty, autonomy, etc; they sold Brexit on largely economic and material terms. But Remainers also mounted their case on economic and material arguments, equally failing to mount a values-based campaign that asserted the values and ideals behind the European project.

All of which makes it quite difficult to turn the discourse around now, and discuss the non-economic and non-material aspects of this question.

prawnsambo · 07-12-2018 08:30AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Did you miss the bit where he said "Irish person"?

murphaph · 07-12-2018 08:46AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

But this is NOT what the Leave campaign said the vote was about at all. They promised continued membership of the single market (more financially prosperous) AND to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state, not OR!

Huge difference. It was never an option, but it was sold to millions of voters as one. The Leave vote was won on lies.

VinLieger · 07-12-2018 08:48AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Ironic coming from the person accusing others that disagree with them of being mentally unwell

lawred2 · 07-12-2018 09:48AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Maybe try to read the post before responding next time.

lawred2 · 07-12-2018 09:52AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

Agreed. It’s a simple matter of conviction.

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

But Brexit was sold on 350m per week AND control over those 'pillars'.. no binary choice there.

Did something go wrong or was it just a crock of sh:t?

Peregrinus · 07-12-2018 09:57AM

lawred2 wrote: »

But Brexit was sold on 350m per week AND control over those 'pillars'.. no binary choice there.

Did something go wrong or was it just a crock of sh:t?

It was a crock of sh:t. There was always a trade-off. Those behing the Leave campaign were either in denial about this, or they were cynically misleading others about it, or a bit of both.

lawred2 · 07-12-2018 10:17AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

It was a crock of sh:t. There was always a trade-off. Those behing the Leave campaign were either in denial about this, or they were cynically misleading others about it, or a bit of both.

but sure we're always free to revise what the vote was about...

FreudianSlippers · 07-12-2018 10:22AM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Any Irish person who thinks that leave is a good idea is either batsh*t insane or trolling.

I'm more worried about the people that see the Brexit shambles and are supportive of Ireland doing the same thing...

FrancieBrady · 07-12-2018 10:35AM

Jeffery Donaldson on Pat Kenny, repudiating the views of the Ulster Farmers Union on the backstop - on the basis of the opinions of a few farmers he talked to in his constituency.

Hurrache · 07-12-2018 10:39AM

Tell me how wrote: »

Maybe not prevailing but what are unionists, and specifically the DUP themselves doing to promote inter-community acceptance?

They won't even represent the wishes of the majority of their community.

Jeffrey Donaldson on Pat Kenny this morning saying that the union is of most importance, then seconds later out of the other side of his mouth says he's not representing northern Ireland when in the house of commons, but just the people who can vote for him in his own constituency.

Professor Moriarty · 07-12-2018 10:57AM

Hurrache wrote: »

Jeffrey Donaldson on Pat Kenny this morning saying that the union is of most importance, then seconds later out of the other side of his mouth says he's not representing northern Ireland when in the house of commons, but just the people who can vote for him in his own constituency.

Of all the DUP MPs, Donaldson is the most intelligent. He knows he's selling snake oil but, politically, he has no choice. For now, anyway.

Enzokk · 07-12-2018 11:00AM

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Lucid Talk poll saying 62% in NI support remaining in SM and CU, even if GB doesn't (Evan Davis tweet - most details in paywalled Times article)!

https://mobile.twitter.com/AaronMcAllorum/status/1070821679671205888/photo/1

Next time I hear Arlene or one of her party saying they represent the interests of the people of NI I will scream at the radio/television/phone, "NO YOU DON'T!!", it is astonishing to me that they are allowed to say this.

I understand the policy of abstaining of representation in the HoC, but this is just another indication that while SF are representing their voters by doing what they said (at least they keep their word), they are also harming the same voters and those others around the country. They are in an impossible position and have been put there by Theresa May and the DUP.

Folkstonian wrote: »

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Well you do have to wonder why someone would vote to not just make themselves poorer but those around them as well. Those that will be fine either way is just selfish and those that voted for less services and benefits that they depend on, well the poster may have been a bit blunt but I don't see it as a rational choice.

That is looking at the choice the UK made, if we had the choice and a politician came to my doorstep to canvas for leaving the EU for less benefits I would call him insane.

lawred2 · 07-12-2018 11:02AM

Enzokk wrote: »

Next time I hear Arlene or one of her party saying they represent the interests of the people of NI I will scream at the radio/television/phone, "NO YOU DON'T!!", it is astonishing to me that they are allowed to say this.

I understand the policy of abstaining of representation in the HoC, but this is just another indication that while SF are representing their voters by doing what they said (at least they keep their word), they are also harming the same voters and those others around the country. They are in an impossible position and have been put there by Theresa May and the DUP.

ah no - not SF again

dr.fuzzenstein · 07-12-2018 11:05AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

My reply wasn't quite as broad as you may think it was and was more aimed at a certain poster stating his nationality.

dr.fuzzenstein · 07-12-2018 11:10AM

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm more worried about the people that see the Brexit shambles and are supportive of Ireland doing the same thing...

Well there are people who believe that the earth is flat, so there will always be those who can be sold the biggest crock ever and they will defend it to their dying breath, because it's "sticking it to the man".
Or rather poking yourself in the eye with a stick, because you don't like what you see.

Enzokk · 07-12-2018 11:11AM

lawred2 wrote: »

ah no - not SF again

Like Brexit it is a talking point that will only go away when Brexit does, which is probably not for the next 15 years or so.:eek:

In other news the government has a plan to deal with medicine shortages. They will overrule a doctor's prescription and have the pharmacy give the patient not what was prescribed.

https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1070949092078039041

https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1070968340884189195

https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1070968819961790464

Project fear and all that rubbish.

prawnsambo · 07-12-2018 11:20AM

Enzokk wrote: »

Like Brexit it is a talking point that will only go away when Brexit does, which is probably not for the next 15 years or so.:eek:

In other news the government has a plan to deal with medicine shortages. They will overrule a doctor's prescription and have the pharmacy give the patient not what was prescribed.

https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1070949092078039041

https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1070968340884189195

https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1070968819961790464

Project fear and all that rubbish.

Because the "highly trained pharmacists" will have full knowledge of all the contra-indications and medical history that the GP considered before prescribing.

VinLieger · 07-12-2018 11:21AM

funkey_monkey wrote: »

https://www-thejournal-ie.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thejournal.ie/brexit-threat-food-shortages-ireland-4381228-Dec2018/?amp=1&amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHCAFYAYABAQ==#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

Ireland is the most stable country in the world in terms of being able to provide food for its population.
So, they are prepared to cause another famine to get Brexit!
Words fail me.

Also weve collectively all agreed there are potential problems in the case of a no deal brexit and been preparing for the better part of two years. They are just now starting to admit there might be some small issues 3 months before they need to have things ready....

lawred2 · 07-12-2018 11:25AM

funkey_monkey wrote: »

https://www-thejournal-ie.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thejournal.ie/brexit-threat-food-shortages-ireland-4381228-Dec2018/?amp=1&amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQHCAFYAYABAQ==#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

Ireland is the most stable country in the world in terms of being able to provide food for its population.
So, they are prepared to cause another famine to get Brexit!
Words fail me.

good grief

Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon reacted to the story, saying that “The sheer moral bankruptcy of the Tory Brexiteers is on full display today.”

succinctly put

J Mysterio · 07-12-2018 11:29AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

There we have it, then. The thread may as well be closed.

You are either pro-remain, or mentally unwell.

If this is the level that debate has slumped to, it’s probably time to call time on discussion.

Not sure why you think you hold some moral high ground on this issue. Half of your contributions here consist of being personally offended by the contributions of others. Fact is, 95% of Irish people think Brexit is a bad idea. They are right.

Gerry T · 07-12-2018 11:30AM

Folkstonian wrote:

Britain (but any EU member state really) has a binary choice to make going forward. To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

Folkstonian wrote:

Agreed. Itâ€™s a simple matter of conviction.

Folkstonian wrote:

Voters just have to decide which is more important to them.

Folkstonian wrote:

I really think people on both sides of the debate in Britain need to be more realistic, and more honest.

I think a number of people have replied to this, but your the first person I've heard that supported brexit that said post leaving, the UK would be fincially worse off. The current debate from brexiteers just ignore the possibility of a hard brexit and focus on the current T.May deal as tying the UK hands and preventing the UK striking free trade deals all over the globe.
It's nonsense, the deal tabled only lasts for transition, end 2020. At that point the UK hard brexit with exception of NI, until the UK pits in the technology solution that allows two separate customs union work with no border infrastructure/controls....which brexiteers have said "the technology exists"....hummm.
But what hasn't being said is, if your right and the choice was really about taking back control, what control are you really taking back. On immigration from the EU the UK always had the power to return an EU citizen that was a burden on the UK state after 3mths, but it never exercised that right, like other EU countries do. On laws the EU primarily gets involved in trade related law...standards, working conditions, employee rights etc.... each country was left alone in how there's laws were implemented and when it came to all other law such as criminal etc it very seldom dictated to member states...so what has really being gained back, very little if anything.
The issue of free movement is captured under my point on immigration, but the loss of the benefits, working abroad, visa free travel, eh1 medical, retiring etc.... are all lost.
The CU & SM are the backbone of the EU, having tariff free trading, common standards and the strength of an 18trillion dollar market to punch globally is all lost....what's the negatives of these....and don't say taking back control of laws and borders, because as I've pointed out their red herrings.

Isn't the truth the UK just hasn't understood the value of the EU and the overall benefits set against the little sovergnity it has to surrender.

A question for you, one I don't know the answer. The UK nett contribution is approx 7.5billion/yr. How much will it cost the UK to control it's borders (customs officials, police, army in NI and the mainland ðŸ˜), replace all the regulatory bodies the EU provides (Hugh list but don't forget the likes of vetenary inspectors travelling globally). How many billion each yr will all that cost.

CelticRambler · 07-12-2018 11:30AM

Folkstonian wrote: »

To be more financially prosperous or to have more control over the traditional pillars of the nation state.

The four-nation state. And therein lies the problem: two of the four are built on different pillars, and are being told that they are not allow exercise control over their destiny because half of the population of one of the four, with alternative ambitions, have decided otherwise.

greenfield21 wrote: »

The people are fed up as it is and world economy is said to have peaked. Imagine what a recession would do. Just look what's going on in France.

What's happening in France is also the product of a toxic FPTP (-type) electoral system, coupled with the French belief that shooting yourself in the head is a valid form of protest against the injustice of the Ruling Classes.

The Hound Gone Wild · 07-12-2018 11:33AM

prawnsambo wrote: »

Because the "highly trained pharmacists" will have full knowledge of all the contra-indications and medical history that the GP considered before prescribing.

Well... Yes. A local community pharmacist knows more about contra-indications and drugs in general than any GP. This looks like pharmacists being able to switch between different drugs of the same class. A pharmacist is more than qualified to make that call, obvious exceptions aside.

VinLieger · 07-12-2018 11:37AM

The Hound Gone Wild wrote: »

Well... Yes. A local community pharmacist knows more about contra-indications and drugs in general than any GP. This looks like pharmacists being able to switch between different drugs of the same class. A pharmacist is more than qualified to make that call, obvious exceptions aside.

They are absolutely not qualified for this as they have no clue of the medical history and nor should they

Call me Al · 07-12-2018 11:39AM

The Hound Gone Wild wrote: »

Well... Yes. A local community pharmacist knows more about contra-indications and drugs in general than any GP. This looks like pharmacists being able to switch between different drugs of the same class. A pharmacist is more than qualified to make that call, obvious exceptions aside.

They are not the patient's doctor. They know the drugs, they don't know the patient.

Brexit discussion thread V - No Pic/GIF dumps please

Comments