The EU Referendum - Thursday 23 June (with voting poll)

by Derbymanc Sat 11 Jun 2016, 10:15 am

First topic message reminder :

Hopefully it will stop the arguments about Gib and we can tell Spain to pee off

by Duty281 Thu 16 Jun 2016, 1:22 pm

EU referendum poll:
Remain: 42% (-2)
Leave: 45% (+7)
(via Survation, phone / 15 Jun)

Another phone poll, another swing, another Leave lead. It's going exactly as I predicted.

by Coxy001 Thu 16 Jun 2016, 1:24 pm

Munchkin wrote:If the EU would be forced into reforms by a Brexit, why didn't Cameron succeed in his reform demands earlier this year. The EU understood the pressure Cameron was under to deliver these reforms, and they understood that a failure to deliver these reforms may provoke a UK withdrawal from the EU.

In the event of a Brexit the EU will be forced to reform, but there's little evidence to suggest that any meaningful reform will happen if Remain wins the day.

Au contraire.. Juncker, as much of a tittie he is, and the rest of the top dawgs will be overly keen to nip any further referendums in the bud if we were to remain. In this scenario they would again react by looking to stabilise the EU and discourage this far right movement from gaining any further traction.

by SecretFly Thu 16 Jun 2016, 1:29 pm

It isn't a far right movement. It's people, normal people - feeling the autocratic squeeze, feeling the 'behave yourself' coming from people in the same vein as Mr Juncker.

by Guest Thu 16 Jun 2016, 1:36 pm

Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I don't think it is. Why would any Euro nation want to penalise a country they rely on for export? Why would any Euro nation impose tarrifs when free trade is a benefit to both?

Did you read my last two posts?! I'll spell it out for you AGAIN, which do you think the EU is more likely to do:

Scenario 1) We leave. They give us completely free access to the single market with no (or low) tariffs, no blockers and we don't have to pay anything and don't have to accept freedom of movement. As a result the far right numpties across Europe see this happening and there is a massive drum being hit for "Why on earth do we have to be bound by rules, pay for membership when GB get it all for free????". The possibility of the EU disintegrating in this scenario is very high as other states would hold their own referendum to leave with the case study being GB having the best of both worlds.

Scenario 2) We leave and the EU, to make a massive example of us, tariffs and block us up the arse with trade deals. They sacrafice the short term issues of losing out on our exports for the greater long term stability of the EU. "Oh but I hear you say, we have the likes of BMW etc here" - well the EU could or would quite simply chuck a big wedge of cash for ze Germans to relocate their manufacturing plants to mainland Europe from GB. Again, short term pain of having to manufacture here but long term stability for the EU. In this scenario we are totally screwed as the EU flexes it much bigger muscles than we have individually and does a massive smash and run land grab.

Or are you not able to read more than 3 lines without getting distracted?

I read it, but believe it a weak argument due to the economic impact on those nations forcing tarrifs on their export market. I did say as much. Maybe it is you that can't grasp simply stated counters to your hysterical doomsday scenario?

I have looked at both the Norwegian and Swiss models and think it's highly likely that the UK will trade with the EU similar to Norway at present. Now, that doesn't mean the UK is free of costs, rules or regulations. On balance the UK's economy will still likely suffer loss, although it does open the way for markets outside of the EU. Although the UK will be free to negotiate it's own deals with the likes of China, the worlds fastest growing economies are going to want to prioritise the bigger EU market.

All sides are engaged in predicting what the future will be post Brexit. I don't buy into your fantastical, pulled from the air, prophesies, but that doesn't mean I support Brexit. I don't. I do tend to try and keep in touch with reality though.

by Guest Thu 16 Jun 2016, 1:49 pm

Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:If the EU would be forced into reforms by a Brexit, why didn't Cameron succeed in his reform demands earlier this year. The EU understood the pressure Cameron was under to deliver these reforms, and they understood that a failure to deliver these reforms may provoke a UK withdrawal from the EU.

In the event of a Brexit the EU will be forced to reform, but there's little evidence to suggest that any meaningful reform will happen if Remain wins the day.

Au contraire.. Juncker, as much of a tittie he is, and the rest of the top dawgs will be overly keen to nip any further referendums in the bud if we were to remain. In this scenario they would again react by looking to stabilise the EU and discourage this far right movement from gaining any further traction.

Speculation without precedent.

by **ShahenshahG** Thu 16 Jun 2016, 1:51 pm

It would crack me up something chronic if we got Brexit and had to adhere to the free movement principle.

by funnyExiledScot Thu 16 Jun 2016, 2:13 pm

Duty281 wrote:All global financial markets are currently in decline, and this is nothing to do with the prospect of the people of the United Kingdom heroically slaying the European Union.

I mean, we could be talking about this instead:

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/15/germans-largest-bank-says-massive-uk-grown-brexit-bbc-remainers-silent/

That just isn't true, and you know it. The swing in the polls has clearly been a major factor in the FTSE slide and the fall in valuation of the pound. Not the only factor, obviously, but the events have directly coincided and almost all financial commentators are attributing the increasing likelihood of Brexit as a major factor.

Next you're going to tell me that markets like uncertainty.

by funnyExiledScot Thu 16 Jun 2016, 2:41 pm

Duty281 wrote:
The Sandal Bomber wrote:
Duty281 wrote:
The Sandal Bomber wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/15/michael-gove-father-company-eu-policies-fish-processing-aberdeen

Cynical bullying by some Guardian jobsworth (and I'm no fan of Gove).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/michael-gove-defends-his-disputed-claim-about-the-eu-destroying-his-fathers-business-a7084301.html

They should probably try headlining with some of the benefits of the EU...oh yeah, there aren't any!

Are you ever going to answer why you endorsed that open europe report when it's success hinged on getting rid of so many workers rights?

A complete untruth.

I quoted the 'between 0.8% worse off and 0.6% better off' figure that Open Europe thought was most likely. High-scale deregulation, i.e. getting rid of many workers' rights, led Open Europe to offer a figure of up to 1.6% better off.

The former was the one I quoted, which does not mean getting rid of many workers' rights, not the latter, which would.

Not sure you've read the report properly. The -0.8% - +0.6% range is available following what Open Europe refers to a "Politically Realistic" set of options being followed, but when you read you deregulation section in full this still involves meaningful deregulation in the areas of workers rights, climate change and financial regulation. I personally think these are good things and that we ought to be keeping them. I rather like the idea of bankers bonuses being capped in some way (and I work in the FS industry), I do think action needs to be taken to tackle climate change and promote renewable energy and I think things like on-call time rules, compensatory rest, agency workers rules, holiday roll-over, redundancy (particularly important after a Leave vote) and works councils add some value to society. Those are the "politically realistic" items requiring to be scrapped to reach your magic target of "-0.8% - +0.6%" (as well as other assumptions coming to fruition as noted below).

The items they rule out as being "politically sensitive" are holiday entitlements (who needs those), antidiscrimination legislation (well, as a British white male with private education I'll be ok so who cares??) and asbestos rules (we need more of that in our lives). Still, if you cut that Bloated Brussels Bureaucrat Red Tap Nonsense you might be able to stretch to the +0.6 - +1.55% territory. Happy days. Still, that assumes a nice favourable trade deal with the EU, opening up new markets via favourable trade deals with the rest of the world (and the report does warm of the downside of these being increased competition from low cost economies, something the Brexiters have recently been upset about in the context of competition from Poland - I'm sure Malaysia and Indonesia will be fine though) and, of course, that all the businesses which have been saying they'll leave the UK/shift large portions of business to Continental Europe are in fact telling lies about their plans (which is odd, because if you believe the Leave campaign they are going to be better off).

by funnyExiledScot Thu 16 Jun 2016, 2:48 pm

Munchkin wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:If the EU would be forced into reforms by a Brexit, why didn't Cameron succeed in his reform demands earlier this year. The EU understood the pressure Cameron was under to deliver these reforms, and they understood that a failure to deliver these reforms may provoke a UK withdrawal from the EU.

In the event of a Brexit the EU will be forced to reform, but there's little evidence to suggest that any meaningful reform will happen if Remain wins the day.

Au contraire.. Juncker, as much of a tittie he is, and the rest of the top dawgs will be overly keen to nip any further referendums in the bud if we were to remain. In this scenario they would again react by looking to stabilise the EU and discourage this far right movement from gaining any further traction.

Speculation without precedent.

I'd agree with Munchkin on this. I don't think a Remain vote will gave any significant impact on the terms the UK is able to negotiate with the EU. We already have a number of special and unique terms and, if the Project Fear scenario being peddled by Leave (see what I did there) materialises, whereby the UK is "forced" in a United States of Europe, with its own army and our Parliament being reduced to the European equivalent of the Welsh Assembly, we can always just opt out by leaving at that point (and I'll be firmly in the Leave camp in that scenario).

It wouldn't be a bad idea if Remain (i.e. all the major political parties excluding UKIP) agreed a set of future referendum triggers along those lines, to give reassurance that this issue will be revisited if the Leave's Project Fear vision of the future in Europe were to materialise. Best of both worlds, or something along those lines.

by TopHat24/7 Thu 16 Jun 2016, 3:00 pm

Munchkin wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I don't think it is. Why would any Euro nation want to penalise a country they rely on for export? Why would any Euro nation impose tarrifs when free trade is a benefit to both?

Did you read my last two posts?! I'll spell it out for you AGAIN, which do you think the EU is more likely to do:

Scenario 1) We leave. They give us completely free access to the single market with no (or low) tariffs, no blockers and we don't have to pay anything and don't have to accept freedom of movement. As a result the far right numpties across Europe see this happening and there is a massive drum being hit for "Why on earth do we have to be bound by rules, pay for membership when GB get it all for free????". The possibility of the EU disintegrating in this scenario is very high as other states would hold their own referendum to leave with the case study being GB having the best of both worlds.

Scenario 2) We leave and the EU, to make a massive example of us, tariffs and block us up the arse with trade deals. They sacrafice the short term issues of losing out on our exports for the greater long term stability of the EU. "Oh but I hear you say, we have the likes of BMW etc here" - well the EU could or would quite simply chuck a big wedge of cash for ze Germans to relocate their manufacturing plants to mainland Europe from GB. Again, short term pain of having to manufacture here but long term stability for the EU. In this scenario we are totally screwed as the EU flexes it much bigger muscles than we have individually and does a massive smash and run land grab.

Or are you not able to read more than 3 lines without getting distracted?

I read it, but believe it a weak argument due to the economic impact on those nations forcing tarrifs on their export market. I did say as much. Maybe it is you that can't grasp simply stated counters to your hysterical doomsday scenario?

I have looked at both the Norwegian and Swiss models and think it's highly likely that the UK will trade with the EU similar to Norway at presentSo basically we pay to play, have no decision making ability, 100% rules adherence (rules to which we have no input) AND free movement of labour (the crux of the issue for 99% of Brexiteers). Cheers, big improvement . Now, that doesn't mean the UK is free of costs, rules or regulations. On balance the UK's economy will still likely suffer loss, although it does open the way for markets outside of the EU. Although the UK will be free to negotiate it's own deals with the likes of China Want to check with our steel industry how that's working out??, the worlds fastest growing economies are going to want to prioritise the bigger EU market.

All sides are engaged in predicting what the future will be post Brexit. I don't buy into your fantastical, pulled from the air, prophesies, but that doesn't mean I support Brexit. I don't. I do tend to try and keep in touch with reality though.

by Guest Thu 16 Jun 2016, 3:10 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I don't think it is. Why would any Euro nation want to penalise a country they rely on for export? Why would any Euro nation impose tarrifs when free trade is a benefit to both?

Did you read my last two posts?! I'll spell it out for you AGAIN, which do you think the EU is more likely to do:

Scenario 1) We leave. They give us completely free access to the single market with no (or low) tariffs, no blockers and we don't have to pay anything and don't have to accept freedom of movement. As a result the far right numpties across Europe see this happening and there is a massive drum being hit for "Why on earth do we have to be bound by rules, pay for membership when GB get it all for free????". The possibility of the EU disintegrating in this scenario is very high as other states would hold their own referendum to leave with the case study being GB having the best of both worlds.

Scenario 2) We leave and the EU, to make a massive example of us, tariffs and block us up the arse with trade deals. They sacrafice the short term issues of losing out on our exports for the greater long term stability of the EU. "Oh but I hear you say, we have the likes of BMW etc here" - well the EU could or would quite simply chuck a big wedge of cash for ze Germans to relocate their manufacturing plants to mainland Europe from GB. Again, short term pain of having to manufacture here but long term stability for the EU. In this scenario we are totally screwed as the EU flexes it much bigger muscles than we have individually and does a massive smash and run land grab.

Or are you not able to read more than 3 lines without getting distracted?

I read it, but believe it a weak argument due to the economic impact on those nations forcing tarrifs on their export market. I did say as much. Maybe it is you that can't grasp simply stated counters to your hysterical doomsday scenario?

I have looked at both the Norwegian and Swiss models and think it's highly likely that the UK will trade with the EU similar to Norway at presentSo basically we pay to play, have no decision making ability, 100% rules adherence (rules to which we have no input) AND free movement of labour (the crux of the issue for 99% of Brexiteers). Cheers, big improvement . Now, that doesn't mean the UK is free of costs, rules or regulations. On balance the UK's economy will still likely suffer loss, although it does open the way for markets outside of the EU. Although the UK will be free to negotiate it's own deals with the likes of China Want to check with our steel industry how that's working out??, the worlds fastest growing economies are going to want to prioritise the bigger EU market.

All sides are engaged in predicting what the future will be post Brexit. I don't buy into your fantastical, pulled from the air, prophesies, but that doesn't mean I support Brexit. I don't. I do tend to try and keep in touch with reality though.

Sorry, but do you believe you're arguing against me?

by funnyExiledScot Thu 16 Jun 2016, 3:48 pm

Please, I beg both campaigns, do not seek to make political capital out of the brutal attack on Jo Cox. I beg you.

by **ShahenshahG** Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:00 pm

F*cking hell.

by SecretFly Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:03 pm

Nothing can be said. Didn't know a thing about that until Exiled's comments. Shocking.

Poor woman. Hopefully, she pulls through.

by Coxy001 Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:11 pm

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I don't think it is. Why would any Euro nation want to penalise a country they rely on for export? Why would any Euro nation impose tarrifs when free trade is a benefit to both?

Did you read my last two posts?! I'll spell it out for you AGAIN, which do you think the EU is more likely to do:

Scenario 1) We leave. They give us completely free access to the single market with no (or low) tariffs, no blockers and we don't have to pay anything and don't have to accept freedom of movement. As a result the far right numpties across Europe see this happening and there is a massive drum being hit for "Why on earth do we have to be bound by rules, pay for membership when GB get it all for free????". The possibility of the EU disintegrating in this scenario is very high as other states would hold their own referendum to leave with the case study being GB having the best of both worlds.

Scenario 2) We leave and the EU, to make a massive example of us, tariffs and block us up the arse with trade deals. They sacrafice the short term issues of losing out on our exports for the greater long term stability of the EU. "Oh but I hear you say, we have the likes of BMW etc here" - well the EU could or would quite simply chuck a big wedge of cash for ze Germans to relocate their manufacturing plants to mainland Europe from GB. Again, short term pain of having to manufacture here but long term stability for the EU. In this scenario we are totally screwed as the EU flexes it much bigger muscles than we have individually and does a massive smash and run land grab.

Or are you not able to read more than 3 lines without getting distracted?

I read it, but believe it a weak argument due to the economic impact on those nations forcing tarrifs on their export market. I did say as much. Maybe it is you that can't grasp simply stated counters to your hysterical doomsday scenario?

I have looked at both the Norwegian and Swiss models and think it's highly likely that the UK will trade with the EU similar to Norway at presentSo basically we pay to play, have no decision making ability, 100% rules adherence (rules to which we have no input) AND free movement of labour (the crux of the issue for 99% of Brexiteers). Cheers, big improvement . Now, that doesn't mean the UK is free of costs, rules or regulations. On balance the UK's economy will still likely suffer loss, although it does open the way for markets outside of the EU. Although the UK will be free to negotiate it's own deals with the likes of China Want to check with our steel industry how that's working out??, the worlds fastest growing economies are going to want to prioritise the bigger EU market.

All sides are engaged in predicting what the future will be post Brexit. I don't buy into your fantastical, pulled from the air, prophesies, but that doesn't mean I support Brexit. I don't. I do tend to try and keep in touch with reality though.

Bingo bingo bingo.

Another leaver who hasn't read anything but was chatting to his mates over a pint in his local and presents it as though they're speaking sense.

The Norweigan model is a shocker, an absolute shocker of an example to present as if you know what you're on about.

1) We'd have to pay in to the EU
2) We get no say over how it's run
3) We'd still have bureaucrats telling you when you can go to the toilet (or in reality regulating stuff like olive oil)
4) We'd still have to accept freedom of movement
5) We don't have access to certain markets

Beggars belief how the majority of leavers try and comment on the subject yet only succeed in making numpties out of themselves.

by Coxy001 Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:14 pm

Apologies only just saw this after I replied.

Hope she pulls through and this isn't leveraged for political gain.

by funnyExiledScot Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:15 pm

Utterly dreadful. She is a wonderful MP, full of intelligence and heart. I hope she pulls through and recovers from this. Thoughts, of course, are with her family and, in particular, her young children.

As for the attacker, I am lost for words and cannot fathom why a person would do this. I hope the full weight of the criminal justice system falls upon you.

by Guest Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:23 pm

Coxy001 wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I don't think it is. Why would any Euro nation want to penalise a country they rely on for export? Why would any Euro nation impose tarrifs when free trade is a benefit to both?

Did you read my last two posts?! I'll spell it out for you AGAIN, which do you think the EU is more likely to do:

Scenario 1) We leave. They give us completely free access to the single market with no (or low) tariffs, no blockers and we don't have to pay anything and don't have to accept freedom of movement. As a result the far right numpties across Europe see this happening and there is a massive drum being hit for "Why on earth do we have to be bound by rules, pay for membership when GB get it all for free????". The possibility of the EU disintegrating in this scenario is very high as other states would hold their own referendum to leave with the case study being GB having the best of both worlds.

Scenario 2) We leave and the EU, to make a massive example of us, tariffs and block us up the arse with trade deals. They sacrafice the short term issues of losing out on our exports for the greater long term stability of the EU. "Oh but I hear you say, we have the likes of BMW etc here" - well the EU could or would quite simply chuck a big wedge of cash for ze Germans to relocate their manufacturing plants to mainland Europe from GB. Again, short term pain of having to manufacture here but long term stability for the EU. In this scenario we are totally screwed as the EU flexes it much bigger muscles than we have individually and does a massive smash and run land grab.

Or are you not able to read more than 3 lines without getting distracted?

I read it, but believe it a weak argument due to the economic impact on those nations forcing tarrifs on their export market. I did say as much. Maybe it is you that can't grasp simply stated counters to your hysterical doomsday scenario?

I have looked at both the Norwegian and Swiss models and think it's highly likely that the UK will trade with the EU similar to Norway at presentSo basically we pay to play, have no decision making ability, 100% rules adherence (rules to which we have no input) AND free movement of labour (the crux of the issue for 99% of Brexiteers). Cheers, big improvement . Now, that doesn't mean the UK is free of costs, rules or regulations. On balance the UK's economy will still likely suffer loss, although it does open the way for markets outside of the EU. Although the UK will be free to negotiate it's own deals with the likes of China Want to check with our steel industry how that's working out??, the worlds fastest growing economies are going to want to prioritise the bigger EU market.

All sides are engaged in predicting what the future will be post Brexit. I don't buy into your fantastical, pulled from the air, prophesies, but that doesn't mean I support Brexit. I don't. I do tend to try and keep in touch with reality though.

Bingo bingo bingo.

Another leaver who hasn't read anything but was chatting to his mates over a pint in his local and presents it as though they're speaking sense.

The Norweigan model is a shocker, an absolute shocker of an example to present as if you know what you're on about.

1) We'd have to pay in to the EU
2) We get no say over how it's run
3) We'd still have bureaucrats telling you when you can go to the toilet (or in reality regulating stuff like olive oil)
4) We'd still have to accept freedom of movement
5) We don't have access to certain markets

Beggars belief how the majority of leavers try and comment on the subject yet only succeed in making numpties out of themselves.

Who is the leaver who hasn't read anything?

by Guest Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:32 pm

Terrible news about Jo Cox. Difficult to comprehend what goes on in some peoples heads. Twisted. Can only hope she fully recovers.

by temporary21 Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:53 pm

Well camp leave has suspended campaigning for the day out of respect. I think both sides know not to make a point of this

Worryingly I don't think they have to. People are likely already thinking it was a migrant before even being identified given world affairs...

by funnyExiledScot Thu 16 Jun 2016, 4:58 pm

temporary21 wrote:Well camp leave has suspended campaigning for the day out of respect. I think both sides know not to make a point of this

Worryingly I don't think they have to. People are likely already thinking it was a migrant before even being identified given world affairs...

I hope not. The attacker is described as a 52 year old white male called Tommy Mair.

by SecretFly Thu 16 Jun 2016, 5:07 pm

Speculation and 'likely thinking' is probably for another day. Both sides in the debate will be hoping that Jo Cox, who is probably right now going through procedures designed to give her the best chance, comes through this.

by Guest Thu 16 Jun 2016, 5:16 pm

Tragically, Jo Cox has died. Desperate news.

by SecretFly Thu 16 Jun 2016, 5:20 pm

Terrible.....

Basterde who woke up this morning with obviously that intention in his head, given the weapons he had with him.

by funnyExiledScot Thu 16 Jun 2016, 5:24 pm

Unbelievably sad. A beautiful, intelligent and caring individual who has dedicated her life to a whole string of worthy causes and helping others.

Rest in peace you wonderful person.

by temporary21 Thu 16 Jun 2016, 5:35 pm

FU*K!

Terrible news...

by **ShahenshahG** Thu 16 Jun 2016, 5:36 pm

Poor woman. R.I.P and condolences to her family.

by TopHat24/7 Fri 17 Jun 2016, 9:24 am

Munchkin wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I don't think it is. Why would any Euro nation want to penalise a country they rely on for export? Why would any Euro nation impose tarrifs when free trade is a benefit to both?

Did you read my last two posts?! I'll spell it out for you AGAIN, which do you think the EU is more likely to do:

Scenario 1) We leave. They give us completely free access to the single market with no (or low) tariffs, no blockers and we don't have to pay anything and don't have to accept freedom of movement. As a result the far right numpties across Europe see this happening and there is a massive drum being hit for "Why on earth do we have to be bound by rules, pay for membership when GB get it all for free????". The possibility of the EU disintegrating in this scenario is very high as other states would hold their own referendum to leave with the case study being GB having the best of both worlds.

Scenario 2) We leave and the EU, to make a massive example of us, tariffs and block us up the arse with trade deals. They sacrafice the short term issues of losing out on our exports for the greater long term stability of the EU. "Oh but I hear you say, we have the likes of BMW etc here" - well the EU could or would quite simply chuck a big wedge of cash for ze Germans to relocate their manufacturing plants to mainland Europe from GB. Again, short term pain of having to manufacture here but long term stability for the EU. In this scenario we are totally screwed as the EU flexes it much bigger muscles than we have individually and does a massive smash and run land grab.

Or are you not able to read more than 3 lines without getting distracted?

I read it, but believe it a weak argument due to the economic impact on those nations forcing tarrifs on their export market. I did say as much. Maybe it is you that can't grasp simply stated counters to your hysterical doomsday scenario?

I have looked at both the Norwegian and Swiss models and think it's highly likely that the UK will trade with the EU similar to Norway at presentSo basically we pay to play, have no decision making ability, 100% rules adherence (rules to which we have no input) AND free movement of labour (the crux of the issue for 99% of Brexiteers). Cheers, big improvement . Now, that doesn't mean the UK is free of costs, rules or regulations. On balance the UK's economy will still likely suffer loss, although it does open the way for markets outside of the EU. Although the UK will be free to negotiate it's own deals with the likes of China Want to check with our steel industry how that's working out??, the worlds fastest growing economies are going to want to prioritise the bigger EU market.

All sides are engaged in predicting what the future will be post Brexit. I don't buy into your fantastical, pulled from the air, prophesies, but that doesn't mean I support Brexit. I don't. I do tend to try and keep in touch with reality though.

Sorry, but do you believe you're arguing against me?

Pretty sure everything I've read from you is pro Br-exit and firmly in the "of course it will be all ok" camp,

Do correct me if I'm wrong.

by TopHat24/7 Fri 17 Jun 2016, 9:28 am

RIP Jo Cox though. Was reading about her and she seemed charming and genuine with a good heart. Sort of person politics needs.

Horrific for the family.

Morbid but I really want to know what that repulsive c*nt's reasons were. Sick freak.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 17 Jun 2016, 9:30 am

No mate - he's and enlightened remainer who doesn't care for the bullsh*t of his own side but subscribes to the bullsh*t of the other side.

by **ShahenshahG** Fri 17 Jun 2016, 9:30 am

Yeah, looks like some who went into it for the love of it rather than personal ambition

by TopHat24/7 Fri 17 Jun 2016, 9:35 am

Yeh, just went back through a few posts and see what you mean. Very confusing.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 17 Jun 2016, 10:16 am

The Sandal Bomber wrote:Yeah, looks like some who went into it for the love of it rather than personal ambition

She was. She spent her youth, post-Cambridge University (first in her family to go to Uni), working for numerous charities and travelling to some of the world's more deprived areas. She dedicated her life to helping these people, and fought tireless both home and abroad to improve lives. Obviously needing to settle in the UK to start a family she looked at how she could continue to improve lives with less travel, first working for charities in the UK and then standing for MP. The tributes from her constituents have been heart warming and saddening at the same time.

I moaned earlier on this thread about the dearth of quality individuals in Parliament. I did not mean Jo Cox. My allegiance to Labour ceased upon the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, and Jo Cox was one of those who nominated him (to promote debate within the party, although she subsequently voted for Liz Kendall), but she openly admitted her mistake (how many politicians do that??) and sought to rectify it by demanding Labour improve and setting out the changes that needed to be made.

I've followed politics closely since my teenage years, and yesterday was comfortably one of the saddest days I recall.

Her husband has made it clear that she would have wanted the debates to continue, and we should do just that.

by Guest Fri 17 Jun 2016, 11:41 am

TopHat24/7 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
TopHat24/7 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:
Munchkin wrote:I don't think it is. Why would any Euro nation want to penalise a country they rely on for export? Why would any Euro nation impose tarrifs when free trade is a benefit to both?

Did you read my last two posts?! I'll spell it out for you AGAIN, which do you think the EU is more likely to do:

Scenario 1) We leave. They give us completely free access to the single market with no (or low) tariffs, no blockers and we don't have to pay anything and don't have to accept freedom of movement. As a result the far right numpties across Europe see this happening and there is a massive drum being hit for "Why on earth do we have to be bound by rules, pay for membership when GB get it all for free????". The possibility of the EU disintegrating in this scenario is very high as other states would hold their own referendum to leave with the case study being GB having the best of both worlds.

Scenario 2) We leave and the EU, to make a massive example of us, tariffs and block us up the arse with trade deals. They sacrafice the short term issues of losing out on our exports for the greater long term stability of the EU. "Oh but I hear you say, we have the likes of BMW etc here" - well the EU could or would quite simply chuck a big wedge of cash for ze Germans to relocate their manufacturing plants to mainland Europe from GB. Again, short term pain of having to manufacture here but long term stability for the EU. In this scenario we are totally screwed as the EU flexes it much bigger muscles than we have individually and does a massive smash and run land grab.

Or are you not able to read more than 3 lines without getting distracted?

I read it, but believe it a weak argument due to the economic impact on those nations forcing tarrifs on their export market. I did say as much. Maybe it is you that can't grasp simply stated counters to your hysterical doomsday scenario?

I have looked at both the Norwegian and Swiss models and think it's highly likely that the UK will trade with the EU similar to Norway at presentSo basically we pay to play, have no decision making ability, 100% rules adherence (rules to which we have no input) AND free movement of labour (the crux of the issue for 99% of Brexiteers). Cheers, big improvement . Now, that doesn't mean the UK is free of costs, rules or regulations. On balance the UK's economy will still likely suffer loss, although it does open the way for markets outside of the EU. Although the UK will be free to negotiate it's own deals with the likes of China Want to check with our steel industry how that's working out??, the worlds fastest growing economies are going to want to prioritise the bigger EU market.

All sides are engaged in predicting what the future will be post Brexit. I don't buy into your fantastical, pulled from the air, prophesies, but that doesn't mean I support Brexit. I don't. I do tend to try and keep in touch with reality though.

Sorry, but do you believe you're arguing against me?

Pretty sure everything I've read from you is pro Br-exit and firmly in the "of course it will be all ok" camp,

Do correct me if I'm wrong.

Sure, you're wrong.

A problem with the debates is that supporters from both sides are spouting nonsense, and in doing so they discredit their respective sides. A bit like you and sandlebomber. All froth and abuse.

I am someone who thinks the UK should not leave the EU, but I'm not a supporter of the Remain camp. The Remain camp is an embarrassment and their tactics may well push the UK out of the EU. Some on this thread are a fair reflection of the dross that has been served up.

by Guest Fri 17 Jun 2016, 11:53 am

The Sandal Bomber wrote:No mate - he's and enlightened remainer who doesn't care for the bullsh*t of his own side but subscribes to the bullsh*t of the other side.

You're right. I don't care for the BS coming out of the Remain camp. It's frustrating because it could push the UK out of Europe.

Because I call the Remain BS for what it is, it doesn't mean I subscribe to the other side, but I can understand why you might not understand that. Some things are just beyond the grasp of others.

by SecretFly Fri 17 Jun 2016, 11:58 am

Munchkin wrote:

A problem with the debates is .... All froth and abuse.

Correct.

Anger is a legitimate emotion in any debate. But respecting the alternate voice whilst disagreeing with it is doable.... if people try hard enough.

But the will isn't there - and as mentioned on the mainstream media (of course they would too but...) they pinpoint social media (that's us folks Wink

)as one of the main vehicles where anger turns to abuse, intolerance of views, insults, fury and mayhem.

by Coxy001 Fri 17 Jun 2016, 11:58 am

If you went on a head to head scenario leave would be well ahead in the bullsh*t stakes.

Looking from an outside in viewpoint there have been more bloggers, editorials that have produced a counter fact sheet to the leave campaigns arguments than there have been for the remain.

Why?

Because one has an army of economists, massive financial institutions, world leaders and so forth that are backing us to remain. The other has, erm, Donald Trump and some obscure blog called Open Europe.

by Guest Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:00 pm

Coxy001 wrote:If you went on a head to head scenario leave would be well ahead in the bullsh*t stakes.

Looking from an outside in viewpoint there have been more bloggers, editorials that have produced a counter fact sheet to the leave campaigns arguments than there have been for the remain.

Why?

Because one has an army of economists, massive financial institutions, world leaders and so forth that are backing us to remain. The other has, erm, Donald Trump and some obscure blog called Open Europe.

Maybe, but it isn't leave that is losing the debate.

by **Hero** Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:02 pm

I agree with you do a degree, Remain camp at times have not done themselves any favors. They were up against Boris, Farage and Michael Gove who are the political equivalent of the Three Stooges yet still managed to screw it up.

by Guest Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:09 pm

Hero wrote:I agree with you do a degree, Remain camp at times have not done themselves any favors. They were up against Boris, Farage and Michael Gove who are the political equivalent of the Three Stooges yet still managed to screw it up.

Agree on Boris but, having watched Gove in action on Wednesday evening, he is an articulate, intelligent politician who gets his points across very well. He won that debate. All the Remain side could counter him with was an appeal to the emotions from a Spanish lady and some nonsense about a Guardian interview with his father.

by Coxy001 Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:16 pm

Munchkin wrote:
Hero wrote:I agree with you do a degree, Remain camp at times have not done themselves any favors. They were up against Boris, Farage and Michael Gove who are the political equivalent of the Three Stooges yet still managed to screw it up.

Agree on Boris but, having watched Gove in action on Wednesday evening, he is an articulate, intelligent politician who gets his points across very well. He won that debate. All the Remain side could counter him with was an appeal to the emotions from a Spanish lady and some nonsense about a Guardian interview with his father.

Boris is a bit of a buffoon, Farage is just well.. a shocking human being. Gove though is the brains of their campaign and is one of the more intelligent politicans around today.

The problem is that he views himself as someone who gives a damn about the people. It wasn't so long ago he got booted out of the cabinet and demoted as he was going on a crusade against those people he now claims to represent. The same can be said for IDS and Boris.

Regarding losing the debate: Hitler had an entire nation behind him. Doesn't exactly make his arguements right and what is best now, does it?

by Coxy001 Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:21 pm

Funny thing is when we've got Boris, Gove and Farage in government they may as well get rid of the BofE, Treasury and co after saying all their reports and nonsense and that the economic information they have scribbled on the back of a fag packet is more factually correct than some of the smartest economic minds in the country.

by SecretFly Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:25 pm

Coxy001 wrote:
Regarding losing the debate: Hitler had an entire nation behind him. Doesn't exactly make his arguements right and what is best now, does it?

According to you yourself, Cameron and the Remain campaign have the entire World virtually behind them. So yes, your final sentence holds true for that assumed reality too.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:34 pm

Munchkin wrote:
Hero wrote:I agree with you do a degree, Remain camp at times have not done themselves any favors. They were up against Boris, Farage and Michael Gove who are the political equivalent of the Three Stooges yet still managed to screw it up.

Agree on Boris but, having watched Gove in action on Wednesday evening, he is an articulate, intelligent politician who gets his points across very well. He won that debate. All the Remain side could counter him with was an appeal to the emotions from a Spanish lady and some nonsense about a Guardian interview with his father.

Absolutely. It would be wrong to underestimate Gove. He is intelligent and articulate and is another MP who is in the business for the right reasons. He is also very effective. Sadly, I disagree with vast amounts of what he stands for (and in his education brief the manner in which he went about achieving his goals), but of the trio of Leave leaders he is by some distance the most impressive.

Farage is not intelligent but he is effective. He is highly skilled at reducing complex arguments into simplistic populist soundbites, which is why his followers proclaim that he "wins" the debates. It's because he speaks a language they understand. Simple messages, passionately delivered.

Boris is the enigma for me. He is an extremely lazy politician who is in it for all the wrong reasons. But he is smart, and extremely calculating. He is also adept at covering up a painful lack of knowledge (usually through humour), and his failure to grasp detail (or bother to learn it) is legendary. He does a great job of convincing people to like him, despite his politics being the polar opposite of what those same people believe. "I like him because he's a character". "I like him because he's different to the other politicians". "I like him because he makes me laugh". Very few appear to like him for what he believes in, and that's because he actually believes in so little beyond becoming Prime Minister. He's like a Diet Cameron in some respects.

Back to Gove. I honestly think he's the biggest single reason for the Leave campaign doing so well.

by Hammersmith harrier Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:42 pm

Coxy001 wrote:If you went on a head to head scenario leave would be well ahead in the bullsh*t stakes.

Looking from an outside in viewpoint there have been more bloggers, editorials that have produced a counter fact sheet to the leave campaigns arguments than there have been for the remain.

Why?

Because one has an army of economists, massive financial institutions, world leaders and so forth that are backing us to remain. The other has, erm, Donald Trump and some obscure blog called Open Europe.

Call me cynical but all of that seems to benefit the rich, most of the debate seems to centre around big business, immigration and the NHS, very little of it seems to centre around the actual core voters, the average man in the street who's not a millionaire.

by SecretFly Fri 17 Jun 2016, 12:54 pm

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
Coxy001 wrote:

Because one has an army of economists, massive financial institutions, world leaders and so forth that are backing us to remain. The other has, erm, Donald Trump and some obscure blog called Open Europe.

Call me cynical but all of that seems to benefit the rich, most of the debate seems to centre around big business, immigration and the NHS, very little of it seems to centre around the actual core voters, the average man in the street who's not a millionaire.

...and people who don't use reams of accountancy details, reports, piecharts and explanations to decide how to feel about Leave or Remain.

by Guest Fri 17 Jun 2016, 1:51 pm

funnyExiledScot wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Hero wrote:I agree with you do a degree, Remain camp at times have not done themselves any favors. They were up against Boris, Farage and Michael Gove who are the political equivalent of the Three Stooges yet still managed to screw it up.

Agree on Boris but, having watched Gove in action on Wednesday evening, he is an articulate, intelligent politician who gets his points across very well. He won that debate. All the Remain side could counter him with was an appeal to the emotions from a Spanish lady and some nonsense about a Guardian interview with his father.

Absolutely. It would be wrong to underestimate Gove. He is intelligent and articulate and is another MP who is in the business for the right reasons. He is also very effective. Sadly, I disagree with vast amounts of what he stands for (and in his education brief the manner in which he went about achieving his goals), but of the trio of Leave leaders he is by some distance the most impressive.

Farage is not intelligent but he is effective. He is highly skilled at reducing complex arguments into simplistic populist soundbites, which is why his followers proclaim that he "wins" the debates. It's because he speaks a language they understand. Simple messages, passionately delivered.

Boris is the enigma for me. He is an extremely lazy politician who is in it for all the wrong reasons. But he is smart, and extremely calculating. He is also adept at covering up a painful lack of knowledge (usually through humour), and his failure to grasp detail (or bother to learn it) is legendary. He does a great job of convincing people to like him, despite his politics being the polar opposite of what those same people believe. "I like him because he's a character". "I like him because he's different to the other politicians". "I like him because he makes me laugh". Very few appear to like him for what he believes in, and that's because he actually believes in so little beyond becoming Prime Minister. He's like a Diet Cameron in some respects.

Back to Gove. I honestly think he's the biggest single reason for the Leave campaign doing so well.

I disagree with what Farage stands for, but I think he's a very shrewd and intelligent man. There's not a chance that he would have been as successful as he has been if he wasn't.

Sometimes it requires real intelligence to communicate the complex, or the profound, simply.

Just for fun:

“Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence.”
― Albert Einstein

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
― Mark Twain

“All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think, we become.”
― Siddhārtha Gautama Buddha

by SecretFly Fri 17 Jun 2016, 1:54 pm

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
― Mark Twain

That's Mark Twain for you Wink

- one of my favourite writers of any era.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 17 Jun 2016, 2:08 pm

Munchkin wrote:
funnyExiledScot wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
Hero wrote:I agree with you do a degree, Remain camp at times have not done themselves any favors. They were up against Boris, Farage and Michael Gove who are the political equivalent of the Three Stooges yet still managed to screw it up.

Agree on Boris but, having watched Gove in action on Wednesday evening, he is an articulate, intelligent politician who gets his points across very well. He won that debate. All the Remain side could counter him with was an appeal to the emotions from a Spanish lady and some nonsense about a Guardian interview with his father.

Absolutely. It would be wrong to underestimate Gove. He is intelligent and articulate and is another MP who is in the business for the right reasons. He is also very effective. Sadly, I disagree with vast amounts of what he stands for (and in his education brief the manner in which he went about achieving his goals), but of the trio of Leave leaders he is by some distance the most impressive.

Farage is not intelligent but he is effective. He is highly skilled at reducing complex arguments into simplistic populist soundbites, which is why his followers proclaim that he "wins" the debates. It's because he speaks a language they understand. Simple messages, passionately delivered.

Boris is the enigma for me. He is an extremely lazy politician who is in it for all the wrong reasons. But he is smart, and extremely calculating. He is also adept at covering up a painful lack of knowledge (usually through humour), and his failure to grasp detail (or bother to learn it) is legendary. He does a great job of convincing people to like him, despite his politics being the polar opposite of what those same people believe. "I like him because he's a character". "I like him because he's different to the other politicians". "I like him because he makes me laugh". Very few appear to like him for what he believes in, and that's because he actually believes in so little beyond becoming Prime Minister. He's like a Diet Cameron in some respects.

Back to Gove. I honestly think he's the biggest single reason for the Leave campaign doing so well.

I disagree with what Farage stands for, but I think he's a very shrewd and intelligent man. There's not a chance that he would have been as successful as he has been if he wasn't.

Sometimes it requires real intelligence to communicate the complex, or the profound, simply.

This is certainly true, but in the case of Farage I can't quite tell if he understands the complexity, and that the world isn't black/white and chooses to ignore it in favour of his simplistic soundbite driven politics, or whether he just doesn't get it, and just wants a simple world of pub beer gardens, jam and summer fetes.

For example he's said a number of things which indicate to me that he's not up to speed on the detail. For example he has, in the past, made a huge deal of the Norway model being an example of how a country can operate successfully from outside the EU. As I said above, either he knew that Norway was unworkable for his vision of the UK but he just wanted his supporters to hear that there was a precedent/model for what he's advocating, or he didn't, and heard someone say that Norway has free trade outwith the EU and just put two and two together to reach three.

He is also prone to say very odd things for a "shrewd and intelligent man". His comments on the difference between German and Romanian immigrants for example, and the odd claim that "foreigners" can just turn up to the UK and get a council house in two weeks, skipping the queue ahead of UK applicants. These things are just untrue and very much undermine his campaign.

He's both heavily spun and heavily unspun at the same time. I would certainly call him "effective", but I don't think he'll go down as one of politics' great thinkers.

by funnyExiledScot Fri 17 Jun 2016, 2:09 pm

SecretFly wrote:“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”
― Mark Twain

That's Mark Twain for you - one of my favourite writers of any era.

This is true, although it now appears to apply to Leave rather than Remain!

by Sponsored content