Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

tracey3596

ilovehouses wrote: »

You could go back 30 years and would be able to prove the EU isn't all harmony and light.

That could be difficult when the EU did not come into being until the Maastricht Treaty of 1992.

gfplux

tracey3596 wrote: »

Populism and the desire of other Europeans to voice their anti-EU points of view is not relevant to this thread when it was being discussed by you?
When citizens rights are being discussed by you?
:rotfl:
I think that what you really mean is that you didn't like that post.

Well you certainly got that right. I did not like the post. Once again we have too much divorce. Complaints about the ex, telling everyone how bad the ex is at managing their life.
For me the title of this thread is about Britain negotiating to leave the EU.
Wether the ex is spending too much money, sleeping with the neighbour or is not mowing the lawn is not relevant.

By the way.
You brought up Citizens rights and I only pointed out that the EU have been important in supporting workers rights in the UK. Now that is relevant isn't it?

Ballard

tracey3596 wrote: »

I haven't seen any posts contradicting the fact that at the first opportunity to do so, the British public did indeed vote to leave the EU.
See posts immediately following yours at #2768 like #2769, 2774 etc.
My thoughts are that the British public when given the opportunity voiced their opinion.

You stated that as UK citizens we did not sign up for the EU. My point was that we did through our parliamentary representatives. Nothing that has been posted since then has contradicted that.

I agree that we have voted to leave the EU. I have never said anything that opposes that view.

To state, as you did, that my post had been proved to be incorrect was not true. To further state that your point that we voted to leave at the first opportunity, whilst true, is not relevant to my point.

tracey3596

gfplux wrote: »

Well you certainly got that right. I did not like the post. Once again we have too much divorce. Complaints about the ex, telling everyone how bad the ex is at managing their life.
For me the title of this thread is about Britain negotiating to leave the EU.
Wether the ex is spending too much money, sleeping with the neighbour or is not mowing the lawn is not relevant.

By the way.
You brought up Citizens rights and I only pointed out that the EU have been important in supporting workers rights in the UK. Now that is relevant isn't it?

You waffle on about "the ex" and "not mowing the lawn" yet describe factual current occurrences within the EU as "irrelevant"?
:rotfl:

Citizens rights, eh?
Are you ready?
Then tell us please how diverse the various organisations within the EU are - and then read this from Politico since you seem to quite like them.
https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-diversity-exits-the-eu-brussels/

The U.K. has some of the most far-reaching anti-discrimination legislation in the EU

More?
Read Wiki as a starter.

Following the election of David Cameron and the formation of the Conservative—Liberal Democrat coalition, the Equality Act 2010 passed into law which unified anti-discrimination laws including the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, the Equal Pay Act 1970, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and the Race Relations Act 1976 to provide a unified approach to anti-discrimination protections in the workplace covering sex, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability and a number of other factors.
The Coalition also implemented a number of measures from the Work and Families Act 2006 and the Pensions Act 2008. They also introduced the Agency Workers Regulations 2010.
Following the Conservative success at the 2015 general election, the government introduced the National Living Wage by amending the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_labour_law_in_the_United_Kingdom

The UK might not be perfect (and I never suggested it was) but the reality is that for centuries the UK has been a global leader in supporting and promoting the various rights of it's peoples.

Arklight

Little Englanders reeling as support for Brexit crumbles:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-second-referendum-latest-poll-remain-ten-points-leave-bmg-a8114406.html

Brexit: Britons now back Remain over Leave by 10 points, exclusive poll shows
Exclusive: The newly published survey gives Remainers their biggest lead since the 2016 referendum

Thrugelmir

gfplux wrote: »

For me the title of this thread is about Britain negotiating to leave the EU.

For the majority of us I suspect it's the future that matters. As unlike a divorce. The relationship still exists. The one thing you don't want. Is the ex still meddling in your personal domestic affairs. Long after separation has been agreed.

Corporal_Perkins

Arklight wrote: »

Little Englanders reeling as support for Brexit crumbles:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-second-referendum-latest-poll-remain-ten-points-leave-bmg-a8114406.html

Polls count for little and a Poll of just 1,500 counts for nothing but they obviously mean something to you so you keep grasping at straws.

wunferall

Ballard wrote: »

You stated that as UK citizens we did not sign up for the EU. My point was that we did through our parliamentary representatives. Nothing that has been posted since then has contradicted that.

I agree that we have voted to leave the EU. I have never said anything that opposes that view.

To state, as you did, that my post had been proved to be incorrect was not true. To further state that your point that we voted to leave at the first opportunity, whilst true, is not relevant to my point.

Semantics have no place here.
It looks like you're obfuscating because UK citizens were never given an opportunity to vote on EU matters until the referendum, were they? Implying that the UK electorate were accepting the imposition of a wide range of EU policies and rulings through their MP is at best disingenuous since many of those policies and rulings were never even brought to the public's attention. How can you have an opinion on something you have no knowledge of? (Even if many in these forums do try to do just that. )

Following a little tour around Europe by Cameron they were brought to the attention of the British public and a vote was arranged during which they voted not to accept the imposition of EU rulings and policies, instead asking to leave the EU.
As you yourself say,

Ballard wrote: »

This is how our democracy works. We don't have endless referendums for every vote in the house.

Quite.
At the first opportunity the result clearly showed that your [QUOTE=Ballard;73578888._All_we_can_do_as_citizens_is_to_elect_a_representative_into_parliament_and_urge_them_to_act_in_the_way_that_we_would_like.[/QUOTE] clearly showed that those actions were not in fact what the UK public wanted.
As such you have indeed been proven to be incorrect because the people of the UK decided in a referendum that our parliamentary representatives did not in fact act in our best interests regarding our membership of the EU.

Again,

Ballard wrote: »

You stated that as UK citizens we did not sign up for the EU. My point was that we did through our parliamentary representatives.

and at the first known opportunity we made clear our dissatisfaction by voting to leave the EU.

FYI the UK generally opposed the Maastricht Treaty and the UK did not opt in until after a Labour government was elected in 1997. Nowhere in the Labour manifesto prior to that election was there any indication of the federalist intent of the EU at that time and indeed the Labour 1997 manifesto clearly said "We oppose a European federal superstate". Yet this is what the EU increasingly became, hence the parallel increase in UK disillusionment of the EU.

kabayiri

In the referendum the voters were not given a vote to decide on migration, mass or otherwise, as some would suggest.

The figures made it very clear that a significant chunk of migration occurs outside of the EU.

No. We got to vote on the core principles. Specific to the migration topic, was the idea of FoM.

I thought it was a half based crock then, and I still believe the same.

If I'm offered a choice to reject it, then why wouldn't I take it? If they had offered a workable alternative to FoM I would have listened. But they did not.

True FoM suggests an elastic capability in the UK to produce the required infrastructure and services almost on demand. We have never had that capability. We were never going to get the investment money in the North to provide that capability. It was always going to collapse somehow.

Ballard

I did not state that UK voters were accepting of the stance that the UK government took on our membership of the EU. A poster asked for proof that we had agreed with the expansion of the common market. I provided proof that our parliament had taken us in on our behalf. At no point did I say, or even imply, that everyone agreed.

The referendum showed that the majority of those who voted want us to leave. I have never disputed this. This does not, however, change the fact that I made in my opening paragraph.

I'm not going to bother to continue to go over the same line again because it seems that some posters are seemingly unable to grasp the simple fact that we, as a country, did agree to continue with the common market when it expanded into the EU. Thus usual suspects will undoubtedly thank wunferall for their post regardless of the fact that it makes no sense in relation to my posts on the subject.