Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

SouthLondonUser

cogito wrote: »

Whatever you may think, I didn’t actually agree anything. So on planet SouthLondonUser, 1 +1 = 3. What exactly is it that you are using?

If facts were on your side, it would be very easy for you to blow me away with clear, indisputable facts that prove me wrong. Why have you not done so?

For example, you could have said: Remain could have meant A, B, and C. These 3 options are incompatible among each other because... Such and such advocated A, such and such advocated B and such and such advocated C. They said so multiple times, e.g. during this speech - on that newspaper - on that TV show, etc. Had Remain won, the advocates of A B and C would be fighting tooth and nail to implement their version of remain. Etc etc etc.

Are you familiar with the concept of FACTS???

Opinions don't count for much if they can't be backed up. There are people whose opinion is that the Earth is flat, that vaccines cause autism, that certain races are genetically inferior, etc.

SouthLondonUser

movilogo wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/15/majority-of-europeans-expect-end-of-eu-within-20-years

from a remain rag

Historically, how many events of this proportion were predicted with a modicum of accuracy decades in advance????

I find it more telling that populist parties have toned down their rhetoric ahead of the EU elections. Think of it: the populist wind is blowing across Europe. The Brits have voted to leave. It would be the perfect timing for anti-EU parties to pop up all over and/or for the current populist parties to strengthen their anti-EU rhetoric. Yet, AFAIK, this has NOT been happening.

I am not aware of Italexit or Grexit parties being created - are you?

As far as I can tell from the press, the populist parties in Europe are not strengthening their anti-EU message. There's the usual drivel against Merkel and the Bruxelles bureaucracy, but NO ONE else is talking about leaving the EU.

Why do you think that is?
My interpretation is that it is because the Brexit mess is showing to the whole world what a chaotic and self-harming decision it is to leave. Brexiters will no doubt disagree, but why? I'd be most interested in hearing their thoughts...

ben501

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

• leave has always meant many different, incompatible things, from hard, no-deal Brexit to the delusional have-your-cake-and-eat-it vision of same benefits, fewer obligations
• that voting remain meant one thing and one thing only
• and that therefore the real majority was to remain, since the choice was not binary at all?

The first bit, undeniably true.
The rest, nothing more than 'remainer' opinion/arrogance.



What about all those who were/are unhappy with the way things are going with the EU, but preferred being in to out? As it's been pointed out countless times, the future is not set. Perhaps some of those who voted to remain did so hoping that further concessions would be made. Some have clearly said they want us to adopt the Euro, which we won't be under the existing setup, so 'Remain' can still be interpreted as many things.


That people voted 'Remain' probably just meant for some they considered it better than a leap into the unknown.
If you want to split the leave vote into people's hopes and ideas, why not do the same for those who voted remain?

Moby

Tromking wrote: »

There is growing evidence that Europeans are becoming less federalist in outlook when its comes to membership of the EU. The current penchant in Western democracies for voting for populist/nationalist politicians is marked. I see no sign that Brussels has a handle on the situation either.

It's a good day today after that news! Another failed privatisation being reversed after 5 years! I fought so hard against it Trom!:-)

SouthLondonUser

ben501 wrote: »

The first bit, undeniably true.
The rest, nothing more than 'remainer' opinion/arrogance.

Yet one more case in which Brexiters deny something, angrily denounce remainers’ arrogance but, oh what a shocking coincidence, they have for some weird reason forgot to substantiate their point with anything even remotely resembling a FACT.

ben501 wrote: »

What about all those who were/are unhappy with the way things are going with the EU, but preferred being in to out? As it's been pointed out countless times, the future is not set.

Yes, what about them? Please explain. Politics is about choosing the least worst option. Whether those who voted remain loved the EU or disliked it but still thought it was better to remain is totally irrelevant for the discussion. My point is not that every remainer loved the EU to bits, but that voting remain meant one thing, while voting leave has always meant multiple incompatible things. You have utterly and miserably failed to prove otherwise.

Yes, the future is not set. So what? No one can forecast the future. I don't think anyone has ever said they could predict what would happen in European politics in a decade, any more than they could realistically predict what would happen in British politics over the same timeframe.

ben501 wrote: »

Perhaps some of those who voted to remain did so hoping that further concessions would be made.

if so, they were idiots. Cameron utterly failed to extract more concessions. The EU was adamant that there would be no more concessions.
Are you aware of anyone actually hoping for further concessions?
Are you aware of any politician actually saying that?
Are you aware of anyone in the Remain campaign saying that?
Please either explain or apologise and admit this point makes no sense.

ben501 wrote: »

Some have clearly said they want us to adopt the Euro, which we won't be under the existing setup, so 'Remain' can still be interpreted as many things.

Again: who? When?
Maybe some remainers want to adopt the euro. But how many? Has it ever been a policy of the Remain campaign? Has it ever been in the manifesto of any party? Has any remainer ever mentioned in the campaign that voting remain would have meant adopting the euro?
Please either explain or admit that ‘adopting the euro’ is totally irrelevant to the discussion.

ben501 wrote: »

[...]
If you want to split the leave vote into people's hopes and ideas, why not do the same for those who voted remain?

Because voting remain meant one thing. Voting leave didn't. This means that the real majority was to remain; Again, if 48% vote to stay, 26% vote to go north and 26% vote to go south, yes, 52% voted to go 'elsewhere', but there is no consensus on where to go! The choice was not binary!!

I ask again: have there been contradictions in the Remain campaign over what remain would have meant? Had remain won, would the country still be agonising in a limbo unable to make up its mind, or would the outcome have been very clear and there would have been no doubt on how to implement it?

You seem so sure of your opinions. Yet why can'you substantiate them?????

StevieJ

Moby wrote: »

It's a good day today after that news! Another failed privatisation being reversed after 5 years! I fought so hard against it Trom!:-)

How much has that guy cost the country?

Moby

StevieJ wrote: »

How much has that guy cost the country?

Estimates say the Government has already spent £467m cancelling contracts and bailing out the private companies....of course that doesn't take into account the incalculable damage caused to the profession and the service users!

borntobefree

Does The Brexit Party have no manifesto because they actually have no idea how to deliver Brexit?

cogito

borntobefree wrote: »

Does The Brexit Party have no manifesto because they actually have no idea how to deliver Brexit?

Do either the Tories or Labour have a manifesto?

Takedap

cogito wrote: »

The biggest remain lie of all. Remain has never meant the status quo.
I have no words.....

Directly from the Cambridge Dictionary.


REMAIN: formal to stay in the same place or in the same condition: