Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

BobQ

Herzlos wrote: »

We have a TV channel that allows us to watch TM in her day job, it's all public record. Those that don't like her can probably cite plenty of concrete reasons.

I assume the EU has similar records but we don't as a whole look at it.

I've never met May but I've seen enough of her to know she's a horrible human being. I don't think those attacking EU elected leaders have the same level of information.

The same TV channel broadcasts excerpts from the EU Parliament. The EU Parliament is broadcast as a web based TV service.

I have not met May either and do not think I would like her. But "horrible human being"? That goes too far, she is stubborn person, probably quite shy and I suspect is incredibly dull having dedicated much of her life to politics. But not horrible

She will probably be judged badly by history as a poor PM and a poor politician who failed in most of the things she did. But she is not unique in that.

Arklight

cogito wrote: »

You mean de Gaulle didn’t refer to the rest of Europe being just trimmings when meeting Konrad Adenauer at the Elysee Palace in 1963? Is that the one?

De Gaulle was a great European and was completely right to block the UK's admittance. Britain has only ever been an Atlanticist Trojan horse. European integration is decades behind what it would have been without the constant brake of British self interest.

The Brexiters best friends (if they had the wherwithal to realise) are the Europeans, because it is ultimately in their interests that we go, and without a route back in.

BikingBud

Takedap wrote: »

MPs are elected to act in the best interest of their country & their constituents. If they truly believe that the country is about to commit a massive act of self-harm, it is their duty to try to prevent this.

Do you really believe the they do this?

If so you are more naive than one could ever imagine.

I would suggest that in the real world MPs are required, via party politics, to ensure the status quo doesn't change and that those with their snouts very firmly in the trough are not bothered by the petty troubles that the electorate have to endure.

The sooner significant electoral reforms takes place and politicians actually become accountable rather than just representing the vested interests and lobbyists the better for all of us.

How many of the 650 have ever actually done an honest days work?

Where is their perspective of reality founded?

BobQ

BikingBud wrote: »

What is happening in Parliament is a sham. An excessively large group of self interested and very self protective people that are generally out of touch with the people that they are paid to represent.

Democracy and the British political system is broken. Perhaps the failure to deliver Brexit will be the long overdue catalyst for electoral reform.

The EU elections should be really interesting:

2016 was not a perfect referendum. Neither side presented their case competently and both sides misrepresented each other's case as well as their own.

But the 2017 General Election confirmed a change in the electorate's position. There is no real mandate for a no deal Brexit and no majority government.

Somehow we need to consensus position in Parliament or a new mandate. Unfortunately neither May or Corbyn are capable of arriving at a consensus. The obvious way of doing this is to state 10 or so clear positions and allow politicians to rank them using a single transferrable vote system.

Remain - revoke Article 50
Remain - Revoke Article 50 but actively seek changes to immigration rules
Leave - with no agreement under WTO terms
Leave - Join EFTA , belong to EEA
Leave - Remain in Customs Union, accept backstop
Leave - Remain in Customs Union only if no backstop
Leave - Approve WA subject to agreeing Free Trade Deal for goods only
Leave -Approve WA subject to agreeing Free Trade Deal for l for services only

You could also have duplicate options with or without a confirmatory referendum involving the most popular option

If MPs voted once with all of these options ranked from 1 -16 and used STV a decicion would emerge.

SpiderLegs

BobQ wrote: »

1. Remain - revoke Article 50
2. Remain - Revoke Article 50 but actively seek changes to immigration rules
3.Leave - with no agreement under WTO terms
4.Leave - Join EFTA , belong to EEA
5.Leave - Remain in Customs Union, accept backstop
6.Leave - Remain in Customs Union only if no backstop
7.Leave - Approve WA subject to agreeing Free Trade Deal for goods only
8.Leave -Approve WA subject to agreeing Free Trade Deal for l for services only

Really there’s a lot of fluff in that list. 1 probably will be off the table after Thursday. What’s the point of 2? 3 has been rejected. 4 has no support. 5 and 6 - well the backstop is irrelevant 7 and 8 - the WA is already dead so non-starters.

What actually needs to happen is for the tories to stop navel gazing and elect a new leader.

Herzlos

SpiderLegs wrote: »

Really there’s a lot of fluff in that list. 1 probably will be off the table after Thursday. What’s the point of 2? 3 has been rejected. 4 has no support. 5 and 6 - well the backstop is irrelevant 7 and 8 - the WA is already dead so non-starters.

What actually needs to happen is for the tories to stop navel gazing and elect a new leader.

The real problem is that all of the options have been ruled out. So where to go now? It needs a new mandate a government with enough of a majority to do something - that means a referendum or a general election. Both are too much democracy for the leavers, though

Takedap

cogito wrote: »

You mean de Gaulle didn’t refer to the rest of Europe being just trimmings when meeting Konrad Adenauer at the Elysee Palace in 1963? Is that the one?

I don't know. I can find a link to a 2016 Times article that attributes the quote to de Gaulle but can't find any verification from any other source.


Could you provide one please?

Tromking

Nasqueron wrote: »

p.s. in your signature, you probably know this and are deliberately misquoting Churchill but in case you didn't, Churchill categorically was not stating he was against the EU. It wasn't even a speech or a piece he wrote, it was an off the cuff remark he shouted at de Gaulle during a row just before the Normandy landings back in 1944 and they made up after over dinner.

I think you're the third person to flag up the Churchill quote in my signature. You can't accuse me of misquoting the fella and then concede in the same paragraph that he actually said it. I'm not sure I've ever said it was a quote made in relation to the EU, especially as the EU only came in being decades after Churchill passed away.
Its the sentiment incumbent in the quote that resonates with me.

melanzana

The NI Border issue will not go away easily either. I have an interest.

But it seems that NI is not on the radar of anyone right now in the UK of Great Britain and NORTHERN IRELAND!

Id say there are forces afoot who will react to a hard border within minutes. Seriously, we do not need any more deaths, or terrorism from either side, or squaddies as cannon fodder anymore..

The Good Friday Agreement will be the key to all this I believe.

Tromking

Takedap wrote: »

Where have I been "condemnatory of my fellow citizens"?

Once again, you seem to believe that 17.4 million spoke with a single voice. I have pointed out that they didn't.


PS, the Mail may have softened it's approach with Geordie Greig in charge but it was a vastly different message sent out by Paul Dacre at the time of the referendum.

Well googled about the recent changes at the Mail.
You were writing about the Daily Mail in the present tense, not just at the time of the referendum.

You stated that the number of leave voters who were thick racists was not an inconsequentially small number, that sounds pretty condemnatory to me. Own it fella if thats whats you believe.