Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

lisyloo

BobQ wrote: »

May is being her usual evasive self in the Commons - not answering questions.

Well she answered that one didn’t she !

LHW99

What EU legislations do you actually not like? (I have to admit, I got an answer to this one, once. Someone doesn't like how EU regulations for deactivating firearms are much stricter and thus to sell a deactivated rifle in the UK you need to send it to get re-deactived from 1 of 2 armouries in the UK at fairly substantial cost. But if that was the only reason to leave we could have just made that process free).

I think you may have this one the wrong way round
https://www.militaria-history.co.uk/articles/new-deactivation-law-comes-into-force/
In that the UK requires a number of additional procedurea on top of the EU regulation.
Separately I have found a number of EU "standards" which make it almost impossible to achieve compliant testing of items due to very narrow requirements on materials and instrumentation.
Whilst by definition "standards" need to specify uniform methods for testing, it is obvious from working through the requirements that the actual demands were written such that they ensure only certain companies' products can be used. In at least one case I have come across, the details were so obscure that it is likely that such testing could only be performed at one specific company.

Herzlos

I wouldn't be surprised, I tool the argument at face value and never looked into it, but I'll have a look.

Cakeguts wrote: »

You won't get any answers to questions like that. They are far too complicated.

They are basic justification for the main pro brexit arguments. To not be able to answer them shows that either the people making the arguments don't know what they are talking about, have never thought about it, or it just can't be justified.

If no-one can provide any detail on why it's good to leave why should be believe it'll be good?

One that I certainly know wouldn't get an answer is this. How do you suppose the French government will persuade the Yellow Vests to pay higher taxes to make up the difference in contributions to the EU if they couldn't get them to pay extra tax on fuel?

I'm not sure there's mich overlap between remain and French domestic policy.
It assumes there's a deficit to make up (that we're not still contributing and the EU can't scale back), and that it must be made by increasing taxes rather than making savings or growing the economy. Very simplistic.
Given all of that, they'd need to outline what they get for their money. Some would be glad to pay up to get rid of us.
How much money do you reckon us no longer contributing is going to cost the average French tax payer? Are we talking €5 Or €500?

Cakeguts

Herzlos wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised, I tool the argument at face value and never looked into it, but I'll have a look.

They are basic justification for the main pro brexit arguments. To not be able to answer them shows that either the people making the arguments don't know what they are talking about, have never thought about it, or it just can't be justified.

If no-one can provide any detail on why it's good to leave why should be believe it'll be good?




I'm not sure there's mich overlap between remain and French domestic policy.
It assumes there's a deficit to make up (that we're not still contributing and the EU can't scale back), and that it must be made by increasing taxes rather than making savings or growing the economy. Very simplistic.
Given all of that, they'd need to outline what they get for their money. Some would be glad to pay up to get rid of us.
How much money do you reckon us no longer contributing is going to cost the average French tax payer? Are we talking €5 Or €500?

They are the Remain answers to Brexit statements. Whatever you write about Brexit you get a reply of one of those statements. If the statement can't be answered using one of those statements they change the subject or don't reply.



If you ask a complicated question that clearly cannot be answered using one of those statements you don't get a reply.



I could completely rot up some of the Remain group sites by just asking questions that those statements can't be used to answer. It is complete propaganda that these people have been fed and they are so brainwashed (?) that they don't seem to notice that they are all repeating themselves. Someone somewhere is using them for their own political aim.

phillw

Cakeguts wrote: »

If you ask a complicated question that clearly cannot be answered using one of those statements you don't get a reply.

They are simple questions. Providing assumed answers is an established method to elicit a response, because people are more likely to give a correct answer if you say something wrong.

All we get is deathly silence.

The simple answer is polite racism, for example https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/mitch-benn-careless-talk-costs-lives-1-5951723 I'm expecting deathly silence from that too.

I wonder how long it will be before someone figures out that the majority in the referendum is smaller than the number of EU citizens that will be applying for settled status & hence leaving the EU is not the will of the people anymore.

With over half the population wishing to be members of the EU we can keep pushing petitions to rejoin through parliament, the will of the people will be heard & there won't be any roadblocks of having to respect the previous referendum as that will have already been implemented..

Cakeguts

phillw wrote: »

They are simple questions. Providing assumed answers is an established method to elicit a response, because people are more likely to give a correct answer if you say something wrong.

All we get is deathly silence.

The simple answer is polite racism, for example https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/mitch-benn-careless-talk-costs-lives-1-5951723 I'm expecting deathly silence from that too.

I wonder how long it will be before someone figures out that the majority in the referendum is smaller than the number of EU citizens that will be applying for settled status & hence leaving the EU is not the will of the people anymore.

With over half the population wishing to be members of the EU we can keep pushing petitions to rejoin through parliament, the will of the people will be heard & there won't be any roadblocks of having to respect the previous referendum as that will have already been implemented..

Providing assumed answers is one thing but who provided them in the first place?



We have got to the ridiculous situation where someone can ask "what do you think of the rise of the far right in the EU" and get the answer "the Leave campaign told lies." There are no thought processes going on.

Herzlos

Cakeguts wrote: »

They are the Remain answers to Brexit statements. Whatever you write about Brexit you get a reply of one of those statements. If the statement can't be answered using one of those statements they change the subject or don't reply.



If you ask a complicated question that clearly cannot be answered using one of those statements you don't get a reply.



I could completely rot up some of the Remain group sites by just asking questions that those statements can't be used to answer. It is complete propaganda that these people have been fed and they are so brainwashed (?) that they don't seem to notice that they are all repeating themselves. Someone somewhere is using them for their own political aim.

But you can't give me a single question that I, a Remainer can't answer, even though I'd argue French tax policy is pretty far out of scope. Yet you've admitted you can't answer my basic brexit questions.

I suspect you were asking leading questions and just not getting the answers you suspect, presumably trying to trick them into admitting that Europe will suffer if we leave which is bizarre for 2 reasons. 1- no-one has ever claimed it won't suffer and 2- one of the fee benefits of brexit is that we don't need to care about things like French funding of EU contributions.

Herzlos

Cakeguts wrote: »

Providing assumed answers is one thing but who provided them in the first place?



We have got to the ridiculous situation where someone can ask "what do you think of the rise of the far right in the EU" and get the answer "the Leave campaign told lies." There are no thought processes going on.

I'd love to see some evidence of this. Got a link to this conversation?

phillw

Cakeguts wrote: »

We have got to the ridiculous situation where someone can ask "what do you think of the rise of the far right in the EU" and get the answer "the Leave campaign told lies." There are no thought processes going on.

I believe you're making that up.

What I think of the rise of the far right is that it's as scary as trump or brexit,

And yes I'm lumping them all together, because whether you like it or not they are linked. With the groups communicating with each other, sharing tactics and funding etc.

As a remain voter I chose to pick the side which I believed in and fight the rise of the far right in the EU from the inside.

Anyone who argues we should leave the EU because of the rise of the far right, has chosen to fight on the side of the far right.

And leave lied is important here, because I think some leave voters were tricked into fighting for the far right & they wouldn't if the campaign had been open and honest about it's intentions.

smipsy

one question that no one seems to be able to give a sensible answer is how is UK getting a better deal outside of the bloc

all the humbug about "we will be able to make our own deals" was repeated like a broken record for leavers.

now it becomes apparent that the trade deals will be worse because:

"By negotiating as a country of 65 million, we start in a significantly less attractive position than when we are a part of a bloc of around 500 million," Donnelly told BI.

i mean, who could have predicted THAT? :shocked:

and in the last two and a half years, UK has managed to sign trade agreements with incredible economic powerhouses such as Chile, Faroe Islands, Israel, Zimbabwe and a bunch of islands. The only notable trade agreement is the one with Switzerland.

That's all, in more than two years of "easiest deals in history".

And of course the actual powerhouses like USA and Japan are going to ask for significant concession in trade talk.

I mean, just so much better than what we have, it's incredible.