Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

Filo25

Joan_number_1 wrote: »

Then get on to Filo25 who suggests that anyone not wanting to be in the EU is populist.

A lot of the Brexit campaign was the very definition of populist, you didn't hear all those bits going after the "Metropolitan Elites", of course it was populist.

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

Should we run every decision from parliament by the electorate?

I thought you wanted another referendum?

Moby

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/oct/05/men-with-few-qualifications-most-exposed-to-brexit

Male workers with few qualifications will be the hardest hit by fresh barriers to trade erected after Britain leaves the European Union, according to one of the UK’s leading thinktanks.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said men in manufacturing jobs who had left school with GCSE qualifications or below were the most exposed to curbs on the flow of goods after Brexit.

Herzlos

Male workers with no qualifications were also one of the more likely groups to vote for Brexit? So I guess it's what they want?

cogito wrote: »

I thought you wanted another referendum?

I do, because we've got absolutely no idea what the people want.


I'm just trying to figure out what the bar is on referendums. Generally I think they are a bad thing - time consuming, divisive, not getting much done. The reason we elect representatives is so that they represent us without us being directly involved. Just one of the myriad of things we outsource for daily life.

gfplux

From Politico a reminder of who Tusk is.

QUOTE
Donald Tusk is a carpenter’s son from communist Poland who spent his youth running the streets as a bloodied football hooligan. He watched gun battles outside his home as a teenager, and was later evicted from his home and jailed for subversive activities against the Soviet state. He eventually rose to become prime minister and stayed in post for seven years in a country where previous elected leaders lasted an average of 13 months. Make no mistake — he is hard as nails.
END QUOTE

Enterprise_1701C

The thing is, if we had had a referendum when the eu decided it wanted to become a superstate then things would have been very different.

The eu has changed from the common market, which we voted to remain in, to a behemoth that wants to take over the world and swallow all countries in it's wake, about which we have only just had chance to vote.

The fact it has changed so much within that time has to make you wonder how much it will change in the next 45 years? When Remain was asked about the eu army they told us that was ridiculous, yet a few months later tusk announced that was what he wanted. What else is coming.

You say we have vetoes and that we will not be obliged to join things like the euro. The eu is planning to stop countries using vetoes on things that normally require unanimous agreement, they instead want to go to qualified majority voting. So their attitude is that people may not agree so we will force it through anyway. What's to stop them forcing us to take the euro if we were to Remain?

The attitude of the eu is what has changed my mind from Remain to Leave. I do not believe we would be Remaining in the eu, we would be in the United States of Europe in all but name. I don't believe a thing they deny anymore.

Enterprise_1701C

gfplux wrote: »

From Politico a reminder of who Tusk is.

QUOTE
Donald Tusk is a carpenter’s son from communist Poland who spent his youth running the streets as a bloodied football hooligan. He watched gun battles outside his home as a teenager, and was later evicted from his home and jailed for subversive activities against the Soviet state. He eventually rose to become prime minister and stayed in post for seven years in a country where previous elected leaders lasted an average of 13 months. Make no mistake — he is hard as nails.
END QUOTE

That explains why he seems to want to take over the world and run it in communist form.

VoucherMan

Herzlos wrote: »

I do, because we've got absolutely no idea what the people want.


I'm just trying to figure out what the bar is on referendums. Generally I think they are a bad thing - time consuming, divisive, not getting much done.

Surely we need a law change before any more 'silly referendums' are held. As it's been pointed out regularly, they are non binding, despite what the electorate was led to believe. Otherwise they could become completely pointless.

As to your attitude on them in general, on what basis did you form your opinion? We've only had three of them here, so hardly enough to form a balanced opinion. If you look on a wider scale, Switzerland manages okay with them.


Maybe the problem is that we don't have enough of them.

Enterprise_1701C

The referendum technically became binding when the government stated they would abide by the decision.

I suspect those that now dislike referendums would be fully in love with them if it had gone the other way.

cogito

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

That explains why he seems to want to take over the world and run it in communist form.

His administration in Poland was utterly corrupt. He learned well from the Russian communists in his younger days.