Brexiters should be 'Ashamed of the harm to come"

CLAPTON

Kohoutek wrote: »

What UK laws in particular did you vote for?

I vote for an MP who represents a party that has a manifesto that sometimes includes issues of law. Sometimes issue of law arise in other ways.
In practice these are often overturned by Bulgaria political appoints to the european courts.

If you wish to claim we don't have a perfect system then I agree with you; however I believe that one base in the UK parliament is less imperfect that the tortuous EU model.

HornetSaver

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Perhaps there was also huge complacency as to the state of the UK economy by remainers.

To point out that a Leave vote was obviously going to result in a run on the pound, the inevitable inflation that the aforementioned drop would bring, and a hardline stance from the EU on the negotiations, amounted to "scaremongering".

But no no, apparently the Remain campaign was complacent about the British economy, not scaremongering.

nkomp18

I am not pleased by the UK government at all at the moment. I don't think EU is worse, in fact EU is the only thing stopping them from completely running the country to the ground.

I still cannot understand how they were allowed to serve so many lies, (350million per week to the NHS?! even had the audacity to plaster it on buses!) and then after winning take it all away and say "Actually you get zero and you should learn some austerity lessons". Would they have won if they hadn't lied? Is misleading so many voters with lies even legal? Why can't they be held accountable for the damage they are now causing? We should be able to take them down by suing them for deceit and the loss of 20% of our living comfort as a result of the falling pound and inflation.

The only hope to stop them now is perhaps Scotland breaking the union apart and showing this rotten government that their lies are causing permanent and irreversible damage.

Thrugelmir

HornetSaver wrote: »

To point out that a Leave vote was obviously going to result in a run on the pound,

Run on the £ was going to happen at some point in time. Never in doubt. The UK cannot kid itself that it can borrow indefinately to fund an unaffordable lifestyle.

CLAPTON

HornetSaver wrote: »

To point out that a Leave vote was obviously going to result in a run on the pound, the inevitable inflation that the aforementioned drop would bring, and a hardline stance from the EU on the negotiations, amounted to "scaremongering".

But no no, apparently the Remain campaign was complacent about the British economy, not scaremongering.

the UK had (and has) large current a/c trade deficit: this was funded by borrowing foreign currency and selling off UK businesses, property etc.
This is a classic conditions for a devaluation of the currency.
Certainly brexit was the trigger :
when would you have preferred it to happen , when the foreign debts had doubled/trebled/ more? and/or when there where nothing of value of sell off?

Inflation is an evitable consequence of devaluation but having a high standard of living by unendling borrowing and selling assets is never going to end well.

gfplux

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Parliament does of course "make" the law in terms of issuing statutes but not all elements of English law are codified and much is built on the development of centuries old common law within the courts where determinations of judges are incorporated as precedent into future law.

This is not of course not something that has increased in modern times, quite the opposite - a few hundred years ago most law was common law developed by judges - and today the proportion of law written by parliament via statutes has never been higher.

But as most statutory laws are incredibly complex, often poorly worded leaving ambiguity, and rarely future proofed for unforeseen developments, even when a law has been written by parliament the courts then determine the limitations of those laws over time and such determinations in effect become part of the law.

This is not a modern judge's view of their role - it's how the law has always worked - a combination of statutory and common law interpreted by the courts and evolving through legal challenge and precedent.

I would add that many of UK laws sit on the statute book but due to lack of resources are almost ignored because there are no resources to enforce them.
Example Texting/phoning while driving and littering.
Which makes the almost religious enforcement of parking regulations seem unbalanced in a modern society!

gfplux

nkomp18 wrote: »

I am not pleased by the UK government at all at the moment. I don't think EU is worse, in fact EU is the only thing stopping them from completely running the country to the ground.

I still cannot understand how they were allowed to serve so many lies, (350million per week to the NHS?! even had the audacity to plaster it on buses!) and then after winning take it all away and say "Actually you get zero and you should learn some austerity lessons". Would they have won if they hadn't lied? Is misleading so many voters with lies even legal? Why can't they be held accountable for the damage they are now causing? We should be able to take them down by suing them for deceit and the loss of 20% of our living comfort as a result of the falling pound and inflation.

The only hope to stop them now is perhaps Scotland breaking the union apart and showing this rotten government that their lies are causing permanent and irreversible damage.

Welcome to the NEW modern world of politics.
British Politiciens have witnessed what worked during the Brexit referendum.
The one mandate that Politiciens have been given is.... lying works and there is no come back, wait, the BIGGER the lie the BETTER the result with NO COMEBACK.
Wait and see what lies will be told during the next election!!!

Thrugelmir

gfplux wrote: »

Example Texting/phoning while driving and littering.

Shall we add drink driving to the list, speeding etc etc.

How about the way foreign lorries are driven on UK roads?

Plenty of purges that catch many people in a short space of time. Far more effective use of resources. When there's more serious crime to be dealt with such as prostitution and gang culture from Eastern Europe. Free movement of people does have downsides as well.

Conrad

Larry Elliot in the Guardian saying devalution is absolutely brilliant for us


See....

As we said, history shows devaluation tends to benefit our economy, and never more so than now when we run such a hideous deficit, borrowing from future growth.

Services benefit totally as they are not import dependent

Poor old Remoaners, you just didn't get it

Marktheshark

Anyone else getting Bored of Hamish and his one man revolution to overturn the referendum using MSE as his chariot in to battle.

Bit of advice, it wont work.