Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

Herzlos

Joan_number_1 wrote: »

LOL - it's the usual remainer denial dance.

Remainers hate the fact not everybody thinks the sun shines out of the EU's rear end, that's why they deny polls like those above and deny the effects of populism.

I'm bemused by this idea that Remainers love the EU. I'm not sure any of the Remainers on here love the EU - it's got plenty of flaws, but it's better than going it alone. Nor have they denied the effects of populism (which they moan about on here).


My comment about polls is because any time a poll is mentioned which shows people shifting away from Leave votes, it's shot down by comments about how unreliable polls are, and thus meaningless. Yet as soon as there's a poll that can be treated as anti-EU if you squint hard enough then are trotted out like gospel. It's the double standard I'm having a go at and not the dodgy conclusions drawn. I'm also somewhat amused that again you didn't actually try and debate the points, instead focusing on trying to shoot us down. If you explain why you think he's wrong, he can either correct you or concede.


I don't like the EU. I like the perks I get from it, and I like the Tories even less. But at the base of it I don't like the EU. I work on logic rather than emotions (which admittedly makes me weird) so I could have been easily sold on the idea of Brexit if it came with any kind of credible plan. My annoyance with Brexit is how it could have been a great revolutionary thing if anyone had any idea what they were doing, and now that it's inevitably going to be a disaster everyone is too pig headed to stop and assess if they still want to charge on over the cliff edge shouting Rule Britannia.

Like .... will there be another election in Germany after the Hesse election and does the result equal the end of Merkel which in turn would lead to a weaker EU?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/28/angela-merkel-germany-elections-eu-europe
Oh and BTW, that is not an anti-EU report.

Brexiteers have been screeching about Merkel being done and days from resigning for about 3 years now, I'll believe it when I see it.

Joan_number_1_2

Herzlos wrote: »

I'm bemused by this idea that Remainers love the EU. I'm not sure any of the Remainers on here love the EU - it's got plenty of flaws, but it's better than going it alone. Nor have they denied the effects of populism (which they moan about on here).

Just as Brexiters are undoubtedly bemused by remainers insisting we hate the EU. It's only remainers opinion that thinks being in the EU is better than "going it alone" - conveniently ignoring the little factoid that the whole of the rest of the world which is outside the EU manages it very nicely.

Herzlos wrote: »

My comment about polls is because any time a poll is mentioned which shows people shifting away from Leave votes, it's shot down by comments about how unreliable polls are, and thus meaningless. Yet as soon as there's a poll that can be treated as anti-EU if you squint hard enough then are trotted out like gospel. It's the double standard I'm having a go at and not the dodgy conclusions drawn. I'm also somewhat amused that again you didn't actually try and debate the points, instead focusing on trying to shoot us down. If you explain why you think he's wrong, he can either correct you or concede.

Real meaning = "I don't like it when the boot is on the other foot".

Herzlos wrote: »

I don't like the EU. I like the perks I get from it, and I like the Tories even less. But at the base of it I don't like the EU. I work on logic rather than emotions (which admittedly makes me weird) so I could have been easily sold on the idea of Brexit if it came with any kind of credible plan. My annoyance with Brexit is how it could have been a great revolutionary thing if anyone had any idea what they were doing, and now that it's inevitably going to be a disaster everyone is too pig headed to stop and assess if they still want to charge on over the cliff edge shouting Rule Britannia.

Real meaning =- "I'm scared of change so I will ignore everything I'm told or I read about positives of Brexit."

Herzlos wrote: »

Brexiteers have been screeching about Merkel being done and days from resigning for about 3 years now, I'll believe it when I see it.

Why do you and other remainers insist upon seeing what isn't there?
Nobody has been "screeching" that Merkel is "done".
You're all too keen on discussing "what if's" and maybe's" but turn puce when a Brexiter suggests a possible negative for the EU.
There's a word for what that is which originates in ancient Greece and begins with the letter "h".

Herzlos

Seriously? That's what you come back with?


Look at the words and respond to the words.


Brexiteers have shot down every 'remain' poll on here for months, and are now relying on polls. That's hypocrisy. That it's misinterpreted is nothing new.


I'm not afraid of change, I just don't think change for changes sake or change with no plan is a good idea. I've seen no logical (though plenty of emotive) justifications for Brexit, nor anything to give me any competence in it's execution.


I could go back through this thread and quote all the times that Brexiteers on here have claimed Merkels downfall was imminent, but there's a lot of posts and you'll ignore me anyway. I'm pretty sure you've ready all 6 of these threads start to finish even if your account started posting fairly recently. Ditto for the stuff about polls.


So do you want to try and counter the arguments, or are details like that beneath you?

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

I'm not sure what answer you're expecting from him, given that he provided you with verifiable facts and you dismissed him without trying to argue or counter anything. One could be mistaken for thinking you know you've not got a point and are trying to dodge out of debating it.
...

He didn't answer the question. That's why.

Yes, you could be mistaken, because you are mistaken.

40+ years of EU membership and we have an infrastructure under strain like never before.

So where was the Remainer's plan to address this? Why did they choose to ignore the number 1 concern of Leave voters?

andrewf75

Joan_number_1 wrote: »

conveniently ignoring the little factoid that the whole of the rest of the world which is outside the EU manages it very nicely.

Which is completely ignoring geography! The fact is in our part of the world, virtually every country is in the EU and even those outside have very strong ties with it. The only major economy in Europe not in the EU or with close ties to it is Russia. There really is no country we can compare ourselves to and the ones often mentioned eg Singapore, New Zealand etc would almost certainly themselves opt to be in the EU in our geographical position. We are treading a unique path. Not saying there isn’t a chance of it coming off, but lets not pretend it isn’t extremely radical – and unprecedented.

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

...
I don't personally give a stuff where a migrant comes from, just that they are law abiding and providing some economic value. I do give a stuff that they are treated in the same way as everyone else. We're supposed to be better than that.
...

Who on earth told you that?

Migrant workers are regularly living in substandard; overcrowded; often unfit; accommodation right now, in *this* country.

You obviously seem unaware or you don't care.

At least I am honest. *If* we want to profit from cheap migration, let's get the cheapest. It's consistent. It fits the globalization model. I might not personally like it, but it would make us money.

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

He didn't answer the question. That's why.

I thought he did.

40+ years of EU membership and we have an infrastructure under strain like never before.

How is that the EU's fault? We were presumably still underinvesting in infrastructure before the EU, too.

So where was the Remainer's plan to address this? Why did they choose to ignore the number 1 concern of Leave voters?

There wasn't one, because we've got a short sighted government that's only interested in selling stuff off to make country club members more money. At least by staying in the EU we'd have more money (based on all of the analysis/reports/predictions) with which to invest, and the EU was making some investments that Westminster never would.


Though the number 1 problem was immigration, which Cameron and Leave pointed out we could already address.

Herzlos

kabayiri wrote: »

Migrant workers are regularly living in substandard; overcrowded; often unfit; accommodation right now, in *this* country.

Some of them are, sure. But so are plenty of natives. Presumably you're just talking about the seasonal labourers? Because I know loads of EU migrants that have nicer houses than me (and pay more council tax).


I'd rather treat everyone fairly than engage in a race to the bottom.

Filo25

Herzlos wrote: »

I thought he did.



How is that the EU's fault? We were presumably still underinvesting in infrastructure before the EU, too.





There wasn't one, because we've got a short sighted government that's only interested in selling stuff off to make country club members more money. At least by staying in the EU we'd have more money (based on all of the analysis/reports/predictions) with which to invest, and the EU was making some investments that Westminster never would.


Though the number 1 problem was immigration, which Cameron and Leave pointed out we could already address.

Indeed.

Of course if we stopped all immigration tomorrow, the issue of the burden of our aging population would become a bigger problem more quickly as well.

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

...
There wasn't one, because we've got a short sighted government that's only interested in selling stuff off to make country club members more money. At least by staying in the EU we'd have more money (based on all of the analysis/reports/predictions) with which to invest, and the EU was making some investments that Westminster never would.


Though the number 1 problem was immigration, which Cameron and Leave pointed out we could already address.

I personally know how my relative makes money out of migrant workers in a food manufacturing business, so I do get this argument that without cheap labour the production would just go elsewhere. He would appreciate even cheaper labour, of course.

Thing is, I don't see much evidence of this financial affluence being ploughed back into the local community. West Yorkshire has some of the most pathetic transport links around.

Surely, you can see the disconnect between country-level wealth, and that money going back into the regions?

Cameron was either unaware of the discontent, or arrogant about the scale of it. In the greater scheme of things, it wouldn't have cost the government that much to address it. Bit late now.