Seth Brundle wrote: » What have they done to create the mess that the UK is currently in? Right, what independent evidence is there that the figure is £200 million? As I understand it, the UK is haemmoraging money because of the uncertainty over the last number of years, not saving money!
That is why it is so maddening that this pledge has turned out to be a simple lie. Yesterday, the official Treasury figures for UK contributions to the EU budget came out. In 2016/17, it showed, the UK contribution to the budget was just £156m a week – less than half of what Vote Leave promised. The entire Vote Leave campaign was built on 200 million little lies.
Deleted User wrote: » That's not what Osbourne claimed. A cursory glance at the links I provided shows that Osbourne and Co. claimed that a "mere vote to Leave" would cause untold economic catastrophe on a Biblical scale. He was wrong. He knew that, and he peddled these lies to manipulate voters into opting for Remain. It's so obvious, it defies belief that you're now defending a Tory!
Faced with the shock to the economy of the Brexit vote, the Bank of England had a choice. It could sit tight and hope the storm would quickly blow over, or it could assume the worst and act accordingly. Perhaps understandably, Threadneedle Street has decided to go for the all-action approach. It was slow to react to the great recession of 2008 and 2009, and was not going to be accused of making the same mistake twice. The risks of doing nothing were higher than the risks of providing oodles of fresh stimulus. To be sure, the Bank could have waited until it had more evidence of how the economy was doing post Brexit. But changes to policy take time to work, so the case for early and aggressive action is strong. As Mark Carney put it, there is a case for stimulus and there is a case for stimulus now.
Deleted User wrote: » Nice. No Remainer is without fault, right?
Deleted User wrote: » As for the 350 million pound, yes, that should not have appeared on the side of the bus. The net figure I, I believe, around 200 million.
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » Your logic defies rational thinking. The UK is still in the EU so surely that is a factor in the economy? As for prospering outside the EU, surely the market would agree and sterling would have gone higher instead of dropping like a stone since the referendum.
CelticRambler wrote: » Well whaddyaknow - I agree with you on that point. But then again the Leave campaign were dishonest about immigration controls: the UK has full control over immigration - even from EU states - but chooses not to exercise it. And, as we've seen by Johnson's antics in Westminster, taking back control of "democracy" hasn't got off to a good start, has it?
Deleted User wrote: » As for the 350 million pound, yes, that should not have appeared on the side of the bus. The net figure I, I believe, around 200 million. But here's the point: I don't believe that even if 200 million were on the bus (or let's go lower, 150 million a week), it would have swayed voters opinions any differently. For instance, those who voted to Leave based on democracy and immigration controls, are unlikely to be swayed by the bus figure - whether it's 150M or 250M or indeed 350M. Those who would not have voted Brexit because of 350M a week on the bus, would not have voted Brexit if it were 150M, and vice versa.
CelticRambler wrote: » The difference between what Remainers said and what Leavers said - at the time of the referendum - is Remainers warned of potential damage, while Leavers deliberately misled the public about actual, provable costs, e.g. the infamous £350m. Leavers such as Johnson continue to engage in the same deliberate misinformation, e.g. promising funding for "40 new hospitals" when the detail of the proposal reveals funding only for upgrades to 6 existing hospitals. Whenever a Remainer is asked to justify their forecast/prediction/speculation, they can provide evidence in the form of current trade, the expected cost of losing EU market share, the cost of acquiring new deals elsewhere, etc. Whenever a Leaver is asked to explain their belief in a Glorious New Economy for Britain, they usually go off on a rant about some perceived insult relating to the referendum campaign. Your recent posts are the perfect (recurring) example.
Deleted User wrote: » I don't believe that even if 200 million were on the bus (or let's go lower, 150 million a week), it would have swayed voters opinions any differently. For instance, those who voted to Leave based on democracy and immigration controls, are unlikely to be swayed by the bus figure - whether it's 150M or 250M or indeed 350M.
Deleted User wrote: » Nice to see that you've overlooked my recent post on the economic lies Remainers told throughout the Referendum campaign - and how the economy is performing far, far better than any Remainer could hope for. If anything, I think Remainers almost want the UK economy to crash, just to satisfy their self-made beliefs that the UK cannot prosper outside of the European Union.
CelticRambler wrote: » The difference between what Remainers said and what Leavers said - at the time of the referendum - is Remainers warned of potential damage, while Leavers deliberately misled the public about actual, provable costs, e.g. the infamous £350m. Leavers such as Johnson continue to engage in the same deliberate misinformation, e.g. promising funding for "40 new hospitals" when the detail of the proposal reveals funding only for upgrades to 6 existing hospitals. Whenever a Remainer is asked to justify their forecast/prediction/speculation, they can provide evidence in the form of current trade, the expected cost of losing EU market share, the cost of acquiring new deals elsewhere, etc.
Deleted User wrote: » Ha, speculative predictions!? If Leave voters engaged in the same type of scaremongering, you'd be the very, very first to point it out!
CelticRambler wrote: » Anyone else notice the coincidence of talking points and news headlines over the last 48 hours: - unemployment is at a record low (Tories say that's GREAT NEWS); employment is also at record low (Tories say look at the unemployment statistics instead); - today's hot topic: immigration, freedom of movement (not), points-based permits (no, please don't ask us about the numbers, we don't do numbers) - A&E waiting times: historically bad, worst ever. Nobody mention that the NHS is one of the major employers of immigrants, including well-qualified EU doctors and nurses whose numbers have dropped dramatically since Brexit. So the immigrants aren't working in the fields picking fruit, and they're not working in the NHS. Will we soon hear that they're not working in the schools either? If unemployment is at a record low, wonder whose going fill all the new jobs that will be created by the post-Brexit boom?
CelticRambler wrote: » Speculative predictions, by definition, cannot be lies.
Deleted User wrote: » Nice to see that you've overlooked my recent post on the economic lies Remainers told throughout the Referendum campaign
CelticRambler wrote: » Anyone else notice the coincidence of talking points and news headlines over the last 48 hours: - unemployment is at a record low (Tories say that's GREAT NEWS); employment is also at record low (Tories say look at the unemployment statistics instead);
Deleted User wrote: » Quite simply because almost two-fifths of Scots are Leavers.
Deleted User wrote: » Quite simply because almost two-fifths of Scots are Leavers. If you were to listen to the SNP all day (who, if Boris Johnson sneezed too loud, they'd claim to "have a new and refreshed mandate for Scottish independence"), you'd almost think that 90% of Scots voted Remain. Furthermore, in the 2017 Election, with Sturgeon banging on about a Second Referendum, the SNP seats dropped from 54 to 35.
Deleted User wrote: » Quite simply because almost two-fifths of Scots are Leavers. If you were to listen to the SNP all day (who, if Boris Johnson sneezed too loud, they'd claim to "have a new and refreshed mandate for Scottish independence"), you'd almost think that 90% of Scots voted Remain.
jimmycrackcorm wrote: » How can you try to rationalize that logic? What was the turnout for the election compared to the referendum? And how can you compare the percentage of votes for a multi choice election to a binary choice in the referendum.
Deleted User wrote: » That when it comes to the upcoming election, it's worth considering that more people voted to Leave the EU than support the SNP. The media, though, treats the SNP as the go-to voice as if it's somehow totally representative - and, given the statistics I cited, things are not that clear cut.
[Deleted User] wrote: » I think that was true in 2017. This time, the political choice is clear - Brexit, No Deal, 2nd Referendum, or Revocation. Parliament will reflect the broad range of choices and act collectively. Though I'd by lying if I didn't say that I hope Johnson secures a working majority and passes his new deal through parliament.
robinph wrote: » Maybe having a general election is a stupid way to figure out brexit then?
[Deleted User] wrote: » On Scotland, it's worth considering that the SNP got 977,569 votes (36.9%) at the last General Election, and 1,018,322 (38.00%) voted to leave the EU. So, this idea that the SNP are the "voice of Scotland" is absurd.
BonnieSituation wrote: » Especially seeing as 1,661,191 (62.0%) voted to remain in the EU. The SNP, a month before the Brexit vote got 46.5% of the popular vote in the Scottish Parliament elections. What's your point?
Deleted User wrote: » On Scotland, it's worth considering that the SNP got 977,569 votes (36.9%) at the last General Election, and 1,018,322 (38.00%) voted to leave the EU. So, this idea that the SNP are the "voice of Scotland" is absurd.
lawred2 wrote: » The Conservatives have lost the economic argument. They have no economic argument. They have no economic high ground.
With the 0.3pc expansion reported on Monday, Britain has now had 13 quarters of economic growth since the Brexit referendum. The evidence is irrefutable: the UK economy has grown faster than Germany, France and the eurozone as a whole for most of the last two years. It is has outgrown several west European states even since the vote. Totting up the exact numbers, it is no longer excusable for the Remainer establishment, the Liberal Democrats, and allied think tanks, to keep claiming that the UK economy is 3pc smaller than it would have been without Brexit, or that we are “3pc poorer” in Westminster parlance. The total accumulated growth for the UK is 4.9pc. This compares with Belgium (4.7pc), or Germany (4.7pc) if we generously assume that there is no German contraction in the third quarter when the final result comes out later this week, not to mention Italy (3.2pc).
Publishing Treasury analysis, he said a Leave vote would cause an "immediate and profound" economic shock, with growth between 3% and 6% lower. David Cameron said it was the "self-destruct option" for the country. But Boris Johnson dismissed the study as "more propaganda" from the Remain side which he claimed was "rattled".
George Osborne will warn that he would have to fill the £30bn black hole in public finances triggered by a vote to leave the European Union by hiking income tax, alcohol and petrol duties and making massive cuts to the NHS, schools and defence.
So if the Tories get a majority Govn't on 40% of the vote, they don't represent the views of the UK? That's your logic.
Tacitus Kilgore wrote: » :pac: SNP Marxist :pac: Alternative last line - is what will fast-track the UK to becoming The United Countries of England & Wales.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/df05300f57fe28ddd3330602c0adbfdb.svg)
