Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Herzlos

ukcarper wrote: »

Personally I think people can protest as much as they like but the politicians should not try to prevent in without a clear mandate which they do not have.

They don't have a clear mandate to do it, either.

ukcarper

Herzlos wrote: »

They don't have a clear mandate to do it, either.

Perhaps not but the majority voted for referendum and to trigger article 50 so in my opinion they are bound to get on with leaving.

Thrugelmir

phillw wrote: »

It's a pity you don't want to embrace the opportunities of diversity and instead wish to revert to protectionism and discriminating against people based on what country they happen to have been born in.

That's a very nieve view of the world. Dangerous in fact.

phillw

AFF8879 wrote: »

That’s a bit rich considering the EU allows freedom of movement and borderless flow for predominantly white, middle class nations yet severely restricts those from developing nations.....

The whole point of the EU is to raise all countries to the same level, it's obvious that countries in the EU are going to be more prosperous than those outside it. Which is why countries want to join. Surely therefore it would be better if all countries in the world were in the EU (or an equivalent organisation).

I assume you are going to be protesting to allow more non white immigrants in post brexit, or your argument is hypocritical.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Why is it a pity to want borders in place to check people before entering a country?

We have borders and the ability to check people. We chose not to spend the money.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

And I never said I didn't wish to embrace diversity. I just don't embrace terrorism. Sorry.

Leaving the EU doesn't have any effect on terrorism.

ukcarper wrote: »

It also counter productive to say you respect the referendum result and then try to undermine it.

You can respect that a minority of the UK population voted to leave the EU and not take that to be a mandate for the kind of brexit that is being argued for by the elite.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

That's a very nieve view of the world. Dangerous in fact.

It's naive to think that leaving the EU will have any effect. It's a false sense of security.

ukcarper

[QUOTE=phillw;74328678



You can respect that a minority of the UK population voted to leave the EU and not take that to be a mandate for the kind of brexit that is being argued for by the elite

.[/QUOTE]

The mandate was not to have to accept all laws of EU and by staying in customs union union and single market we will not obtain that. From where I'm sitting the government are trying to negotiate a reasonable deal and are being hindered by both sides and EU.

It's no good keep harping on about it was a minority of population that voted to leave everybody had opportunity to vote and its only the votes of those that matter.

Tromking

phillw wrote: »

It's a poisoned chalice, politicians need to make it happen but need to make it a success. That is looking more and more as if it's impossible. Politicians also have a duty to vote with their conscience, destroying the country because less than half of the inhabitants won a single vote is not what democracy is about.

Brexit destroying the country is hyperbolic conjecture on your part, the UK would beg to be re-admitted to the EU before we allowed ourselves to be destroyed surely?
Like most desperate remainers you simply refuse to think through the ramifications for our democracy if the instruction to leave the EU is not carried out to the satisfaction of the 17.4m Leave voters.
Honouring the referendum result is precisely what democracy is about, ignore that fact at your peril.

Graham_Devon

phillw wrote: »

Leaving the EU doesn't have any effect on terrorism.

Your posts seem to rely on creating straw-men to argue with and changing the context of what was stated constantly in order to allow you to make your point.

Rather than thinking through what someone has stated, you are simply reacting by stripping out any context, thus making discussion absolutely pointless.

I can't really be bothered with that.

Enterprise_1701C

Of course leaving the eu would affect terrorism. And criminality.

The Germans decided to open their doors to the refugees because they are desperate for people to settle there. Then they started demanding other countries take them in.

In Germany there was a massive number of sex attacks by so-called refugees at the new years celebrations a couple of years ago The simple fact is they have grown up with a different attitude towards women, and there has reportedly been a steady stream of thefts and rapes committed by asylum seakers.

This refers to Germany:The total number of asylum seekers in Germany by the end of 2016 was up 490 per cent compared with 2014.
Almost 300,000 crimes (9 per cent of the total) were linked to refugees/asylum-seekers in 2016, up 42 per cent year-on-year.
Federal statistics indicate that, of almost 4,000 rapes recorded in the years 2015 and 2016, the percentage of non-national perpetrators jumped in that time from 33 to 38 per cent.
A new study this week showed that, in the two-year period to end-2016, the number of refugees in the state of Lower Saxony (population 7 million), jumped by 117 per cent to 163,000, while refugee crime suspects jumped by 242 per cent. Put another way, crimes with a refugee suspect jumped from four per cent in 2014 to 13 per cent two years later.

Now, if they were willing to keep them in Germany that would be fair enough, but they are trying to get other countries to take them in, many against their will.

The simple fact that they are within the eu makes it easier for them to travel elsewhere, it is an easy trip from Germany to France and from then on to the ports where they either try to jump on a train or grab a boat that lands at one of the vulnerable small ports around the country.

Ballard

AFF8879 wrote: »

That’s a bit rich considering the EU allows freedom of movement and borderless flow for predominantly white, middle class nations yet severely restricts those from developing nations.....

There aren't any predominantly non-white nations in Europe. I haven't checked but my suspicion is that there aren't a great number of non-black nations in the AU for similar reasons.

kabayiri

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Your posts seem to rely on creating straw-men to argue with and changing the context of what was stated constantly in order to allow you to make your point.

Rather than thinking through what someone has stated, you are simply reacting by stripping out any context, thus making discussion absolutely pointless.

I can't really be bothered with that.

No need. The clock will tick down and we will leave under A50, regardless of what people moan about on here.

Will people like the leaving terms? Who knows...ask the same question a year from now.

If people don't like it, the political machinery will no doubt respond in some delayed fashion.

A few years from now and it will be viewed just like the way we got through the biggest financial crash for hundreds of years. Just an event.