Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Enterprise_1701C

It would be quite funny if it wasn't plain dangerous. I can't believe it, but apparently Blair is so desperate that he has said that if a hypothetical second referendum still voted to leave he would not rule out a third referendum. He really is so deeply grounded in the eu psyche that he thinks you should keep asking the question until you get the answer YOU want, it doesn't matter what the people want.

unfortunately this is the way the eu work, we saw it with the Eire vote on joining the euro.

As far as I am concerned we will be best off all the way out.

I voted remain, but have been utterly disgusted by the attitude of the eu since the vote. They say they cannot break their rules, but this situation has never been known before, they are making it up as they go along. Rules are there to be at least changed, if they wanted to be nice to us, as they are supposed to be to neighbouring countries, it's written in their constitution fgs, then they would at least meet us half way. Instead they have chosen to be awkward in order to foment disorder here and try to stop us leaving.

You have to ask why they are that desperate to keep us but so against actually trying to forge a deal with us. You don't beg a neighbour to stay and then turn around and say you will never speak to them again just because they wanted to move to an area that was more suited to their needs. All this is an effort to destroy us to make us grovel back and agree to handing the family silver over. Good friends definitely do not try to destroy you to make you stay, good neighbours should bear in mind that a neighbour with a grudge can be very dangerous.

Herzlos

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

unfortunately this is the way the eu work, we saw it with the Eire vote on joining the euro.

But we didn't. This garbage keeps coming up and getting corrected. The EU has never at any point asked the same question until it gets the answer it wants. What it does, and you'll love this, is it asks a question, get's a "no" and then alters the deal to suit the other party, iterating until a suitable deal is met. To the deliberately ignorant this sounds like it's asking the same question over and over until it gets the answer it wants, but to everyone else it's how negotiations work.


I don't think there will ever be a 3rd referendum, Brexiteers are too enraged at the idea of a 2nd one, and I think everyone will give up on it by a 3rd. Of course, should #2 be a "remain" then the Brexiteers will be all for a 3rd referendum :j


All I want is something that gives our elected policy markers some kind of clear mandate.




I also don't see this EU bullying us thing. They are negotiating in the way anyone would with a toddler or unruly child - explain the rules and don't deviate from them. Nothing that's happened to far is unexpected. They've told us clearly that (a) we can't negotiate with individual states and (b) we can't have our cake and eat it.


The only "destruction" they are threatening us with is letting us have our own way.


It's like a divorce where one side doesn't know what they want:


A: I'm leaving
B: OK
A: I mean it, I'm going
B: I know, you said
A: But I still want to use the car
B: No.
A: And the house.
B: No.
A: What about the timeshare?
B: No.
A: Why are you being so unreasonable?
B: !!!!!!?

ukcarper

If they are going to have another referendum they will have to tell us if we are going to lose rebate and have to accept EURO and if we do this remain voter will vote leave and I suspect I would be a long way from being alone.

Herzlos

ukcarper wrote: »

If they are going to have another referendum they will have to tell us if we are going to lose rebate and have to accept EURO and if we do this remain voter will vote leave and I suspect I would be a long way from being alone.

Plenty of remain voters will see that as worthwhile to avoid the damage of Brexit.


But you are right, a follow up referendum would need to have more clarity from both sides, as well as some clarity on how the result will be dealt with.

Enterprise_1701C

Herzlos wrote: »

But we didn't. This garbage keeps coming up and getting corrected. The EU has never at any point asked the same question until it gets the answer it wants.
All I want is something that gives our elected policy markers some kind of clear mandate.

France had to vote again after rejecting the original eu constitution.

The Irish had to vote again after rejecting the Nice treaty and of course after rejecting the euro.

Doubtless there are other examples we have never heard of. The eu actively discourage referenda on treaty changes because they know they will be unpopular.

Of course they claim there will be concessions, but these generally do not happen. They remind me of the way Blair gave away so much of our rebate when the eu agreed to change the CAP. That never happened but we still lost our rebate.

The eu do not play fair, it is time you removed your rose tinted glasses.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

cogito wrote: »

Going back 45 years to when Heath [STRIKE]dragged[/STRIKE] took us into the Common Market, there was never an honest debate about the pros and cons of membership and herein lies the problem..

Honestly I thought you'd have learned from when you were caught out spreading fallacies about the poorest African farmers....:(

The 1970's referendum on Common Market membership had a Yes campaign and a No campaign.

The No campaign said the following....



The British people were told quite clearly that there would be closer union with other countries in that referendum campaign.

To say they weren't, or that it was all about trade, is an outright lie.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

France had to vote again after rejecting the original eu constitution.

The Irish had to vote again after rejecting the Nice treaty and of course after rejecting the euro..

Yes - that's how negotiations work.

Concessions are proposed, a new deal is drawn up, and people can then vote on it again after the changes are made.

That's democracy in action.

Enterprise_1701C

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Yes - that's how negotiations work.

Concessions are proposed, a new deal is drawn up, and people can then vote on it again after the changes are made.

That's democracy in action.

Yep, they said among other things that Ireland would have sovereignty on tax. That lasted until Brussels decided that they would interefere with it, remember Apple? If they can do that what is to stop them going the whole hog?

I do not trust the eu elite as far as I can throw them, they tend to say one thing and do another, if the rules don't allow it they re-write the rules.

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

Plenty of remain voters will see that as worthwhile to avoid the damage of Brexit.


But you are right, a follow up referendum would need to have more clarity from both sides, as well as some clarity on how the result will be dealt with.

I'm not sure you are right adopting EURO would be very bad and that alone would stop many people voting remain.

westernpromise

Herzlos wrote: »

Can you show any citations? I'm not aware of any of that in anything close to the way you're claiming.

Sure:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/622814/EU-plot-to-kick-UK-out-UN-security-council-Nigel-Farage-Theresa-May

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10528852/David-Cameron-flies-to-Brussels-determined-to-fight-EU-drones-programme.html

The remit of the French central bank is simply "to implement the interest rate policy of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_France

Tobin tax:
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxation-financial-sector_en

So none of this is particularly 'out there'. The point is though that what you have done in your response here is precisely what I noted previously: you've said such-and-such a thing would never happen, and the next thing we know it's happening and it's too late to object.

It is this, I think, that motivated a lot of Leave support - the sense that Remain and its antecedents avant la lettre have been untrustworthy for the last 40 years.