Will Brexit really be good for Britain?

Herzlos

Conrad wrote: »

Notice how the doom mongers endlessly move the goal posts, pushing out the day of reckoning further each time their nonsense predictions fail

Not really. There was confusion between "vote" and "triggering" due to the fact Cameron lied through his teeth about his next actions.

Once we realised that they'd be happening independently, the consensus seems to be that nothing will change until the trigger of A50, or the fallout once a deal is reached.

You can cheer all you want because you haven't hit the ground yet, but you've already left the cliff.

Graham_Devon

Herzlos wrote: »

Not really. There was confusion between "vote" and "triggering" due to the fact Cameron lied through his teeth about his next actions.

Once we realised that they'd be happening independently, the consensus seems to be that nothing will change until the trigger of A50, or the fallout once a deal is reached.

You can cheer all you want because you haven't hit the ground yet, but you've already left the cliff.

They were ALWAYS going to happen independently. Was well reported on. Think most understood this at the time, infact can remember discussions on it on here, hence we are able to make the point that Hamish etc categorically referred to a simple vote to leave, rather than actually triggering Brexit itself.

The key missing information was how long the gap between voting and triggering article 50 may be.

However, as no one was prepared for the vote result, no one was really all that interested as how and when article 50 was triggered. Was very much seen as a none issue due to every pollster suggesting remain had the majority vote. Probably also worth remembering back then before the vote, the only real message the government wanted to get out was fear. The finer details weren't and wouldn't be covered.

Herzlos

My bad, I wasn't being clear enough. We were told (and believed) that A50 would be triggered "immediately". Therefore there was no real distinction between the leave vote and the triggering, because they'd be essentially simultaneous, and therefore became synonymous.

We've now got 3 separate events:

1. Leave vote - drop of GBP by about 20% - sounds pretty disastrous. Some jobs going away and some price rises, but nothing major.

2. Triggering of Article 50 - probably not much initially, a drop in GBP/stock market/investment as confidence wavers, but no-one will know any more and nothing much will happen.

3. Leaving date. Either by agreement being met or running out of time. This is when any excrement is likely to hit any ventilation systems.

Conrad

Herzlos wrote: »

Not really. There was confusion between "vote" and "triggering" due to the fact Cameron lied through his teeth about his next actions.

Once we realised that they'd be happening independently, the consensus seems to be that nothing will change until the trigger of A50,

This is the myth I expected to emerge.


Again, AFTER the vote, and once we knew A50 was a way off, Remoaners promised a recession by autumn, then by Xmas, then early 2017, and so it goes.


PREDICTION; I guarantee once A50 is triggered and the schit does not hit the fan, the gloomers will all say 'oh, we never said it would, we said it will hit the fan once the full deal is known'

Graham_Devon

Herzlos wrote: »

My bad, I wasn't being clear enough. We were told (and believed) that A50 would be triggered "immediately". Therefore there was no real distinction between the leave vote and the triggering, because they'd be essentially simultaneous, and therefore became synonymous.

I don't remember that in truth, and don't remember discussing such scenarios on here. I don't recall any media outlet suggesting that the very minute the vote is counted, we leave the EU. Quite the opposite infact. Everyone and his dog involved in this was saying Cameron wouldn't enact t as he'd step down. So just that in itself is enough to suggest it wasn't an immediate thing.

Would have been an impossibility to leave immediately in any case. That's not to say that some parts of the media may have stated what you said was stated - all I'm saying is I can't remember seeing such things.

We had very intense "discussions" on this very forum about what ta vote to leave actually means, and got told by some in no uncertain words that simply voting in a referendum doesn't mean we leave there and then - now, people seem confused that we didn't leave immediately?

I distinctly remember most sides of the media reporting on the 2 year period where we could bargain with the EU once Brexit has been triggered.

Herzlos

Cameron promised that if it was a leave vote, he'd trigger A50 "immediately". Most people took that to mean as soon as practically possible. The assumption being that it'd be within days rather than months.

Herzlos

Conrad wrote: »

PREDICTION; I guarantee once A50 is triggered and the schit does not hit the fan, the gloomers will all say 'oh, we never said it would, we said it will hit the fan once the full deal is known'

If nothing goes wrong at the point A50 is triggered, then I'll happily eat my words. I think I'm pretty safe though.

But who cares about exactly when we thing it's all going to go wrong; how wrong will it need to be before you would admit that it was a bad idea?

Graham_Devon

Herzlos wrote: »

Cameron promised that if it was a leave vote, he'd trigger A50 "immediately". Most people took that to mean as soon as practically possible. The assumption being that it'd be within days rather than months.

Have you got a link to this?

I remember discussions around it, but I remember them in a different way, and distinctly remember many political programmes stating that Cameron wouldn't actually enact leaving, and would step down (which is exactly what happened).

Andrew Neill infact had a whole range of possibilities of who may actually enact the leaving process once Cameron had stepped down (before the vote had took place). May wasn't on the list. Boris was, as was Duncan Smith and Nigel Farage.

This sorts of discussions on the BBC political programme kind of make the point that we would never leave as soon as the votes were counted.

We are going round in circles though and, with respect, we'll both remember what we wish to remember as we probably only saw what we wanted to see at the time. It's human nature.

But if you have a link to Cameron saying it, which if he did, should be pretty easy to find, that would be insightful! If there is a link, no doubt it's more a fear piece designed to create assumptions - much like the emergency budget that never was.

Conrad

I always spoke of 'an orderly transition' over at least 2 years. The Remainers are re-writing history and moving goal posts.


Loads of callers to LBC say the city will collapse the moment A 50 is triggered.

Conrad

Herzlos wrote: »

Cameron promised that if it was a leave vote, he'd trigger A50 "immediately". Most people took that to mean as soon as practically possible. The assumption being that it'd be within days rather than months.

Does not answer the question as to why many Remainers AFTER the vote said we'd be in decline by Autumn and then by Xmas plus lots of other panic driven predictions