If there is a second referendum ...

wunferall

BobQ wrote: »

You need to look no further than #601 for an example

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/member.php?u=1645111

But that was quite mild......

Naughty naughty naughty.

1/ You're referring to a post of either your own or of mine, NOT the OP's.

2/ There is nothing in my post which could even remotely be considered to be bilious or outrageous, even to those with the most delicate of dispositions.


Now if you want to try again and this time without bringing me into your petty squabble I will have no need to correct you.

Zero_Gravitas

A_Pandiculation wrote: »

You're funny. Show me some of your alleged "bile and outrage" then or are you yourself being hypoctitical?
:xmassign:

All right, much against my better judgement I’ll bite. So on the same day you posted:

23-12-18 15:42 A Pandiculation:
“A person's political stance should be given the same respect and a receive a civil attitude from those wanting to debate.”

You also posted (in the “Brexit the economy and house prices part 6” thread):

23-12-18 14:52 A Pandiculation– post #4824:
“I'm wondering if perhaps English is not your first language?

The rest of your post can maybe be best described as the usual poor remainer understanding it its finest. Which I suppose fits with poor language skills too, yet remainers are supposedly the ill-educated ones! In that one post a remainer displays both poor English skills and poor arithmetic skills.”

Along with:

23-12-18 15:12 A Pandiculation – post #4826:
“I think I know what the moaners are being so ..... moany”
(sic – and particularly ironic as in the previous quote you’ve just insulted somebody for their “poor language skills” and in the post to which I'm replying you've put "hypoctitical"...)

And:

23-12-18 15:01 A Pandiculation post #4825:
“It looks like in your rush to disparage because of your hatred you completely misunderstood the point. How unusual for someone so obviously dead set against Brexit.”

(Apologies - I’ve had to present the quotes like this because the quote function doesn’t appear to work across threads – but I do have screen prints of your original posts)

So there you are – posts that show neither respect or a civil attitude, are full of bile and outrage, and demonstrate that you are saying one thing and then doing the opposite – which is pretty much a text-book definition of hypocrisy…

Nasqueron

Fighting behind a flag and demanding different treatment because you happen to be born in X and your neighbour was born in Y is the sort of petty Little Englander attitude I am talking about. For too long people have been divided and ruled by those with power by playing to the sad delusion that we are different because of what it says on your passport or your skin colour or belief structure.

Around 1/3 of leave voters (based on Leave supporter Lord Ashcroft survey after the event) did so primarily to stop or limit immigration, harming our economy because a bunch of people don't like foreigners (economic studies show EU migrants contribute more than they take out by a significant amount).

We are all people and hiding behind nationality is the sad reaction of a Daily Mail / Sun reading population unable to understand that the world will become fairer and nicer if we stop using man made divisions like nationality. Being proud of say a scientific discovery is fine, when you consider it an advancement for the human race (the moon landings for example had multi national cooperation and support) but some people still try and paint it as US only.

Labour along in delusions of nations and division if you like, as and when the generation of my peers and the younger one vote us back into the EU as we recognise the benefits of globalism over petty divisions of nationalism we'll sit back and laugh at the people waving national flags impotently against a more united world that works for the benefit of all, not just those who had the fortune to be on one side of an arbitrary dividing line.

kabayiri

Nasqueron wrote: »

...
Around 1/3 of leave voters (based on Leave supporter Lord Ashcroft survey after the event) did so primarily to stop or limit immigration, harming our economy because a bunch of people don't like foreigners (economic studies show EU migrants contribute more than they take out by a significant amount).
...

I suggested a Leave reason could be to allow us to access much cheaper Labour from elsewhere in the world.

But..it seems that EUphiles think we should pay for increasingly expensive EE labour. That's not a competitive solution IMO.

If you really believe in globalism you source the cheapest resource from anywhere on the planet, with one eye on automating the jobs, so preferably only short term resourcing.

Matt_L

kabayiri wrote: »

I suggested a Leave reason could be to allow us to access much cheaper Labour from elsewhere in the world.

But..it seems that EUphiles think we should pay for increasingly expensive EE labour. That's not a competitive solution IMO.

If you really believe in globalism you source the cheapest resource from anywhere on the planet, with one eye on automating the jobs, so preferably only short term resourcing.

Exactly, all Nasqueron is suggesting is swapping one flag for another. What he/she fails to understand is the fact the most who voted leave want us to deal more with the entire world and not be shackled to the biggest protectionist racket int the world.

His/her entire argument makes no sense what so ever....

kabayiri

Matt_L wrote: »

Exactly, all Nasqueron is suggesting is swapping one flag for another. What he/she fails to understand is the fact the most who voted leave want us to deal more with the entire world and not be shackled to the biggest protectionist racket int the world.

His/her entire argument makes no sense what so ever....

When it comes to skills in demand, the sources of supply can change pretty quickly.

Go back to the 80s and nobody would have looked at India for IT skills.

Barely a generation+ later, and it's one of the biggest sources.

I'm not quite sure why we would place a Hungarian at a premium to a Chinese or Korean engineer.

We don't do that with finished product. Typically now, we consume from wherever on the planet makes most sense.

StevieJ

kabayiri wrote: »

When it comes to skills in demand, the sources of supply can change pretty quickly.

Go back to the 80s and nobody would have looked at India for IT skills.

Barely a generation+ later, and it's one of the biggest sources.

I'm not quite sure why we would place a Hungarian at a premium to a Chinese or Korean engineer.

We don't do that with finished product. Typically now, we consume from wherever on the planet makes most sense.

I am not sure that many of the people who voted Brexit did so to open the jobs market up from European competition to world competition.

kabayiri

StevieJ wrote: »

I am not sure that many of the people who voted Brexit did so to open the jobs market up from European competition to world competition.

I'm not responsible for how anybody else votes though.

It is their choice. I don't have to answer for them.

I quite like the Polish workers who work for my cousin too, but they are starting to expect more money, and the economic background is still pretty challenging.

I understand why he would want to look for cheaper options from elsewhere.

StevieJ

kabayiri wrote: »

I'm not responsible for how anybody else votes though.

It is their choice. I don't have to answer for them.

I quite like the Polish workers who work for my cousin too, but they are starting to expect more money, and the economic background is still pretty challenging.

I understand why he would want to look for cheaper options from elsewhere.

A pity that facet of the Brexit debate was not articulated to the voting public prior to the 2016 vote

badmemory

I do think this whole 52/48 vote is scarily close. After all, if it was a room full of 100 people & 52 had voted for something & 48 against, how many times do you think the vote counters would have checked the numbers voting for & against? At least 3 times, unless the people counting had a vested interest in the for vote of course.


Are we really prepared to say that we have disenfranchised 48% of voters? That they should have absolutely no impact on the world they are going to have to live in? That they are supposed not to care that they are going to lose their jobs? Are we prepared to live in a dictatorship? Unfortunately, it seems the answer to this is yes.


That and the whole shebang based on lies. No wonder we are the laughing stock of the world! If I go abroad in the next year or so I am gonig to say I'm Canadian or Australian, because I don't want the embarrassment of being British, what a sorry tale!