Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Herzlos

Rinoa wrote: »

Why do you think over 1 million 18-24 year olds registered to vote in the month before the election.

Because Brexit got a lot more people interested in politics and the youth wanted to try and do something to stop it?

Here's what he said to NME:

Indeed. Can you show me the bit where he says he'd cancel it, rather than making it easier to manage?

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

Consistent? As in consistently in favour of leaving the EU until this week?

Corbyn is in favour of leaving the EU. His party isn't.
As head of the party, he's decided to stick to what his party want instead of dictating to them.

That's pretty consistent with everything else he's done.

Herzlos

wunferall wrote: »

No doubt because certain factions would be grumbling along the lines of "Again? Move on ...." so
I believe the current favourite is "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed". Which (surprise surprise) received the same "it's meaningless" outcry as "Brexit means Brexit" from certain of the remain faction whilst all the time ignoring that it means exactly what it says.

That's because both "Brexit means Brexit" and "nothing is agreed until it's agreed" are semantically void tautologies. They convey no information, add nothing, and sound stupid.

Obviously, Brexit means Brexit, or it wouldn't be called Brexit.
Obviously, nothing is agreed until it's agreed, or it wouldn't have been agreed.

As well as being an affront to the English language, they are clearly pointless and that makes them even more annoying.

I've still no idea what a "Red white and blue Brexit" is either, come to mention it. And "Ambitious managed divergence" is another abomination.

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

Corbyn is in favour of leaving the EU. His party isn't.
As head of the party, he's decided to stick to what his party want instead of dictating to them.

That's pretty consistent with everything else he's done.

Follow me, boys. I'll be right behind you.

cogito

Theophile wrote: »

There is currently a country that is in a Customs Union with the EU while it's not a member of the EU.
There you go, reconciled.

Yes. A customs union that excludes financial services and various other things. Sounds like that's exactly what we want.

Herzlos

cogito wrote: »

Yes. A customs union that excludes financial services and various other things. Sounds like that's exactly what we want.

Except we want financial services covered, and independent trade policy. The only options that suit Mays "red lines" are detailed on the chart.

cogito wrote: »

Follow me, boys. I'll be right behind you.

You seem to be really offended by a leader that listens to his organisation. Why is that? Surely that's a good thing?

Rough_Justice

phillw wrote: »

More personal attacks. I stopped reading.

Given your history of falling out with other posters these past few days (myself included) you might want to consider whether it is either your attitude or your interpretation leading to that conclusion.

Politely, you might be advised to apply the last part of your post to your own participation.
As might many others too.

phillw wrote: »

Unless all the grand standing and show boating stops then this is a pointless conversation.

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

The joys of democracy. Such a flawed system, but thanks to a 52% to 48% vote it's being hailed as a perfect system which everyone should respect.

Just like....

A motion of no confidence in Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has been passed by the party's MPs.

The 172-40 vote, which is not binding, follows resignations from the shadow cabinet and calls on Mr Corbyn to quit.

Mr Corbyn said the ballot had "no constitutional legitimacy" and said he would not "betray" the members who voted for him by resigning.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Seems as if the leader represents the people and not his party. In fact using the party for his own agenda.

Moby

mrginge wrote: »

Who’s hailing it as perfect?

More selective making-things-up to justify a personal view methinks.

I saw ken Clarke on QT last night. Now I don’t mind ken, he’s fairly sensible on occasion.

But he made a very impassioned justification for voting against the govt based on his own views and he was very keen on having his views accounted for.

Fair enough.

Then he told the good people of Blackpool that despite their personal views on fracking, the govt had the right (and duty) to override them and force actions on them if they believed it to be in the national interest.

So as far as ken goes, it’s trust the govt unless it does something he doesn’t like.

I saw that too. I didn't agree with Clarke on fracking but to say he was being hypocritical is wrong. He did say that fracking was a local issue that should pass a 'public interest' test and then the Govmt could overide a local view! Thats always been there. You also forgot to acknowledge that by your measure Farage was also being hypocritical because he was saying the Govmt should listen to the people on the referendum but not on fracking!

Moby

ilovehouses wrote: »

Mrs May about to start her speech. The BBC say she's going to lay out 5 tests for any deal...



I really hope she explains the assessment process because there's a bit of 'brexit means brexit' about that lot.

This is what this useless Govmt has said regarding their negotiating position since the referendum:- 1 - The exact same benefits as today 2 - No hard border on the island of Ireland or across the UK 3 - Fully negotiated by March 2019 4 - No payment for access to the EU market 5 - A complete end to EU rules and regulations 6 - Continuation of all EU trade deals and new deals ready to come into force. I wonder how much her speech will stand up to that test they set for themselves?