BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

1…5556586061…2110

Comments

  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Did not read in detail but sounds like Thatcher sold the rights for instant gain rather than licensing.
    Agreed. Following Governments went on to follow the lead. Only interested in themselves and the next election.
    Maybe Westminster losing control isn't such a bad idea...

    it really does not seem that long ago that everybody thought they were a bunch of 2nd raters with their snouts in the trough. Now half the country perceives them to be paragons of virtue.
  • gaffer_slow
    gaffer_slow Posts: 417
    There have been points when i have given consideration a Leave vote, as i think that their is some legitimate reasons that support the idea of Brexit. However on balance, the weight of argument is clearly hugely in favor of Remain. Despite this very slight (~15%) inclination towards Leave I have still yet to meet, read or speak to any "Leaver" that makes me think "I want to vote the same way as them."
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    This Week on BBC2 today had an interview with the former Norwegian government minister Anna Tvinnereim regarding the Norwegian EU referendum in 1994. (iPlayer - about 46 minutes in)

    This was the economic argument from the 'In' campaign:

    - Prime Minister and economic elite said they would lose 100,000 jobs
    - Biggest businesses would leave Norway and be no more investment
    - Interest rates would increase significantly
    - Economic downturn would be a disaster for the welfare state, heavy welfare loses and they would lose several benefits and pensions
    - Came up with an economic calculation where every Norwegian family would lose £3000*


    Does that sounds depressingly familiar?


    * I'm guessing converted from Krone for the UK audience.


    Always beware anybody who uses Norway as an example to justify Brexit.


    I was comparing the campaigns and what the PM/Financial experts were saying then and now. It's like a 22 year old echo.


    p.s. I'm fully aware of the Norwegian Wealth Fund. I think the irresponsibility of our politicians will have seen it spent by now!

    As a self confessed expert denier why don't you do a quick bit of research and see if you can figure out if the Norwegian economy really did do better outside of the EU and if so why?

    Things to look for;
    Oil/gas production levels
    Would they have been even better off inside the EU
    Oil/gas prices
    Performance of the global economy

    It is the experts who make themselves looks foolish but constantly forecasts the big decisions wrong. The Norway referendum is just another example.

    There's even a famous book written on the subject of financial experts - "A Random Walk Down Wall Street". You are probably aware of its “A blindfolded monkey throwing darts at a newspaper’s financial pages could select a portfolio that would do just as well as one carefully selected by experts.”

    What you suggest is a pointless exercise as we do not have a Norwegian economy inside the EU running alongside it to compare against
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Bo Duke wrote:
    Y'know the remainers are getting all ranty however no one mentions reform. We've passed the point of kidding ourselves europe works in its current form, but no one comes out and insists on reform. The remainers seem to be digging the heads deepr and deeper into the sand. Maybe the problem will go away?

    And why do you know Europe does not work in its current form?

    All the remainers agree the Europe does not work in its current form. Their argument to stay is because it needs to be reformed. That is not a positive for the EU when everyone thinks it is wrong. Leavers are accused of fantasy post Brexit but the February negotiations prove they are not going to change.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,328
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Did not read in detail but sounds like Thatcher sold the rights for instant gain rather than licensing.
    Agreed. Following Governments went on to follow the lead. Only interested in themselves and the next election.
    Maybe Westminster losing control isn't such a bad idea...

    it really does not seem that long ago that everybody thought they were a bunch of 2nd raters with their snouts in the trough. Now half the country perceives them to be paragons of virtue.
    Are you talking about Westminster or Brussels?
    I propose both.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    This Week on BBC2 today had an interview with the former Norwegian government minister Anna Tvinnereim regarding the Norwegian EU referendum in 1994. (iPlayer - about 46 minutes in)

    This was the economic argument from the 'In' campaign:

    - Prime Minister and economic elite said they would lose 100,000 jobs
    - Biggest businesses would leave Norway and be no more investment
    - Interest rates would increase significantly
    - Economic downturn would be a disaster for the welfare state, heavy welfare loses and they would lose several benefits and pensions
    - Came up with an economic calculation where every Norwegian family would lose £3000*


    Does that sounds depressingly familiar?


    * I'm guessing converted from Krone for the UK audience.


    Always beware anybody who uses Norway as an example to justify Brexit.


    I was comparing the campaigns and what the PM/Financial experts were saying then and now. It's like a 22 year old echo.


    p.s. I'm fully aware of the Norwegian Wealth Fund. I think the irresponsibility of our politicians will have seen it spent by now!

    As a self confessed expert denier why don't you do a quick bit of research and see if you can figure out if the Norwegian economy really did do better outside of the EU and if so why?

    Things to look for;
    Oil/gas production levels
    Would they have been even better off inside the EU
    Oil/gas prices
    Performance of the global economy

    It is the experts who make themselves looks foolish but constantly forecasts the big decisions wrong. The Norway referendum is just another example.

    There's even a famous book written on the subject of financial experts - "A Random Walk Down Wall Street". You are probably aware of its “A blindfolded monkey throwing darts at a newspaper’s financial pages could select a portfolio that would do just as well as one carefully selected by experts.”

    Never heard of it. Bizarrely my bro turned me onto the idea of backing individuals (experts?) rather than stocks. This guy is very good - compare his his expert performance against the monkeys https://www.fundsmith.co.uk/about-us

    What you suggest is a pointless exercise as we do not have a Norwegian economy inside the EU running alongside it to compare against
    Now we are getting somewhere!!!! this is actually quite exciting.... so how do you know that they would not have done even better inside the EU?
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    ... but the February negotiations prove they are not going to change.
    Cameron: Eh hi there chaps, got myself into this situation, you see I promised a referendum after renegotiation. So can we have a negotiation then?
    The Rest: What you got to offer? Nothing? Well xxxx off then, you got yourself into this situation, you face the consequences.

    The brave new world post Brexit.

    BoJo ( for it is indeed he): Hi there Mr Chinese / Indian / Thai / USanian / Saudi / Malayasian / EU rep / whoever chappie, let's negotiate some trade deals.
    The RoW: What you got to offer then? Nothing? Pursing of lips and sucking of teeth, that's going to cost you then. Don't like it? Tough, you got yourself into this situation, you face the consequences.

    No? Not realistic? Oh I suppose we could be lucky and the weight of informed expert opinion could be wrong.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    PBlakeney wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Did not read in detail but sounds like Thatcher sold the rights for instant gain rather than licensing.
    Agreed. Following Governments went on to follow the lead. Only interested in themselves and the next election.
    Maybe Westminster losing control isn't such a bad idea...

    it really does not seem that long ago that everybody thought they were a bunch of 2nd raters with their snouts in the trough. Now half the country perceives them to be paragons of virtue.
    Are you talking about Westminster or Brussels?
    I propose both.

    I was thinking Westminster - what will they do without Brussels to blame?
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Bo Duke wrote:
    Y'know the remainers are getting all ranty however no one mentions reform. We've passed the point of kidding ourselves europe works in its current form, but no one comes out and insists on reform. The remainers seem to be digging the heads deepr and deeper into the sand. Maybe the problem will go away?

    And why do you know Europe does not work in its current form?

    All the remainers agree the Europe does not work in its current form. Their argument to stay is because it needs to be reformed. That is not a positive for the EU when everyone thinks it is wrong. Leavers are accused of fantasy post Brexit but the February negotiations prove they are not going to change.

    name one!!

    and don't be quoting somebody who thinks it could be better. Ideally a policy doc that says "Europe does not work in its current form" but will accept multiple high profile Remainers
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    This Week on BBC2 today had an interview with the former Norwegian government minister Anna Tvinnereim regarding the Norwegian EU referendum in 1994. (iPlayer - about 46 minutes in)

    This was the economic argument from the 'In' campaign:

    - Prime Minister and economic elite said they would lose 100,000 jobs
    - Biggest businesses would leave Norway and be no more investment
    - Interest rates would increase significantly
    - Economic downturn would be a disaster for the welfare state, heavy welfare loses and they would lose several benefits and pensions
    - Came up with an economic calculation where every Norwegian family would lose £3000*


    Does that sounds depressingly familiar?


    * I'm guessing converted from Krone for the UK audience.
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    What you suggest is a pointless exercise as we do not have a Norwegian economy inside the EU running alongside it to compare against

    Now we are getting somewhere!!!! this is actually quite exciting.... so how do you know that they would not have done even better inside the EU?

    I am debunking expert predictions. I have proved it with the above example, the closest we can get to today's situation.

    Look at all the 'IN' campaign expert economic predictions from Norway 1994. None of them happened. If any of the above were true it would have been used by the remain campaign with the words 'It happened in Norway'

    This is mainstay of the remain campaign and they have sucked you in to believing it. The economy is going to be unknown whether we remain or leave but it is only the remain side that are predicting doom and gloom. They same as they did in 1994.
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Bo Duke wrote:
    Y'know the remainers are getting all ranty however no one mentions reform. We've passed the point of kidding ourselves europe works in its current form, but no one comes out and insists on reform. The remainers seem to be digging the heads deepr and deeper into the sand. Maybe the problem will go away?

    And why do you know Europe does not work in its current form?

    All the remainers agree the Europe does not work in its current form. Their argument to stay is because it needs to be reformed. That is not a positive for the EU when everyone thinks it is wrong. Leavers are accused of fantasy post Brexit but the February negotiations prove they are not going to change.

    name one!!

    and don't be quoting somebody who thinks it could be better. Ideally a policy doc that says "Europe does not work in its current form" but will accept multiple high profile Remainers

    If it works in it's current form why does every single remainer say they want to reform it. None of the remain camp are going to explicitly say that but saying reform very much means the same
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    orraloon wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    ... but the February negotiations prove they are not going to change.
    Cameron: Eh hi there chaps, got myself into this situation, you see I promised a referendum after renegotiation. So can we have a negotiation then?
    The Rest: What you got to offer? Nothing? Well xxxx off then, you got yourself into this situation, you face the consequences.

    Those in the EU seem to have changed their tune now they are facing the reality of the situation. This is what the EU media are saying:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36577298
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    This Week on BBC2 today had an interview with the former Norwegian government minister Anna Tvinnereim regarding the Norwegian EU referendum in 1994. (iPlayer - about 46 minutes in)

    This was the economic argument from the 'In' campaign:

    - Prime Minister and economic elite said they would lose 100,000 jobs
    - Biggest businesses would leave Norway and be no more investment
    - Interest rates would increase significantly
    - Economic downturn would be a disaster for the welfare state, heavy welfare loses and they would lose several benefits and pensions
    - Came up with an economic calculation where every Norwegian family would lose £3000*


    Does that sounds depressingly familiar?


    * I'm guessing converted from Krone for the UK audience.
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    What you suggest is a pointless exercise as we do not have a Norwegian economy inside the EU running alongside it to compare against

    Now we are getting somewhere!!!! this is actually quite exciting.... so how do you know that they would not have done even better inside the EU?

    I am debunking expert predictions. I have proved it with the above example, the closest we can get to today's situation.

    Look at all the 'IN' campaign expert economic predictions from Norway 1994. None of them happened. If any of the above were true it would have been used by the remain campaign with the words 'It happened in Norway'

    This is mainstay of the remain campaign and they have sucked you in to believing it. The economy is going to be unknown whether we remain or leave but it is only the remain side that are predicting doom and gloom. They same as they did in 1994.

    oh dear we have slipped back again.

    Check out Pascal's Wager - that is my stance on climate change... ie I don't really believe the experts but do all my reducing, recycling, reusing because it is not worth the risk
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Bo Duke wrote:
    Y'know the remainers are getting all ranty however no one mentions reform. We've passed the point of kidding ourselves europe works in its current form, but no one comes out and insists on reform. The remainers seem to be digging the heads deepr and deeper into the sand. Maybe the problem will go away?

    And why do you know Europe does not work in its current form?

    All the remainers agree the Europe does not work in its current form. Their argument to stay is because it needs to be reformed. That is not a positive for the EU when everyone thinks it is wrong. Leavers are accused of fantasy post Brexit but the February negotiations prove they are not going to change.

    name one!!

    and don't be quoting somebody who thinks it could be better. Ideally a policy doc that says "Europe does not work in its current form" but will accept multiple high profile Remainers

    If it works in it's current form why does every single remainer say they want to reform it. None of the remain camp are going to explicitly say that but saying reform very much means the same

    Definition of reform - make changes in (something, especially an institution or practice) in order to improve it.
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Definition of reform - make changes in (something, especially an institution or practice) in order to improve it.

    synonyms of reform: improve, make better, better, ameliorate, refine, mend, rectify, correct, rehabilitate
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    oh dear we have slipped back again.

    Check out Pascal's Wager - that is my stance on climate change... ie I don't really believe the experts but do all my reducing, recycling, reusing because it is not worth the risk

    You are comparing the science involved in climate change with the science of economics? There is a reason economics is labelled the dismal science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science

    There are photos and measurements we can use to make up our own minds up on climate change.

    The economic forecasts are forward looking prediction based on complex models that have failed in the past. And I have provided evidence where they have been wrong in the past.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Definition of reform - make changes in (something, especially an institution or practice) in order to improve it.

    synonyms of reform: improve, make better, better, ameliorate, refine, mend, rectify, correct, rehabilitate

    as improve is your first (presumably closest example) and that is in my definition why don't we stick with that.

    So yes I believe that the EU could and should be reformed - in my ideal world the only political integration would be to facilitate free trade and that is the ideal that I would like it to move towards. As an example I would scrap CAP because it is a total waste of money.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    oh dear we have slipped back again.

    Check out Pascal's Wager - that is my stance on climate change... ie I don't really believe the experts but do all my reducing, recycling, reusing because it is not worth the risk

    You are comparing the science involved in climate change with the science of economics? There is a reason economics is labelled the dismal science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science

    There are photos and measurements we can use to make up our own minds up on climate change.

    The economic forecasts are forward looking prediction based on complex models that have failed in the past. And I have provided evidence where they have been wrong in the past.

    I am old enough to remember when some of the same climate change scientists were worried about the next ice age.

    In the context you are using it tell me the relevance of "dismal science"
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Definition of reform - make changes in (something, especially an institution or practice) in order to improve it.

    synonyms of reform: improve, make better, better, ameliorate, refine, mend, rectify, correct, rehabilitate

    as improve is your first (presumably closest example) and that is in my definition why don't we stick with that.

    So yes I believe that the EU could and should be reformed - in my ideal world the only political integration would be to facilitate free trade and that is the ideal that I would like it to move towards. As an example I would scrap CAP because it is a total waste of money.

    We are getting somewhere. Your ideal world is the EU that I want to see and would vote for. I don't have the confidence that it will change though, it had a huge opportunity to do so and rejected it. At some point you have to give up on a failing cause.

    Predictably the French will veto your scrapping of CAP so nothing is going to happen there. Just highlights why it won't change. 28 vested interests.
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Why do people meddle where they have no idea what they are talking about?

    Boris Johnson’s “vanity” Cycle Superhighways “clogging up” London’s streets, says Bob Geldof

    http://road.cc/content/news/194096-bori ... reets-says
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    edited June 2016
    POST YOUR VOTE if you have a postal ballot - it needs to arrive by Thursday.
    Here ends the public information announcement

    I have cast my ballot already, and I am resisting the urge to post, however I made a post a few pages back that among other things said that I believe that for most of last century the UK has been a multicultural nation with a side order of ugly racism, whether in the EU or out. I think this obituary illustrates the point:

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sam-king-2dhdpn9rh

    So RIP Mr King, and may your spirit live on in the age of UKIP

    edit: most of the obit I behind the paywall: Sam King came to Britain from Jamaica during ww2 to join the RAF> He returned to Jamaica after the war but returned to the UK in 1948 on the Empire Windrush - the first boat load of commonwealth immigrants invited to work in the UK. He was dismayed by the institutional racism - particularly housing and became a community campaigner for the rights of immigrants, including working in schools to raise awareness of immigrant issues with the children of London. He was the first black mayor of a London borough (Southwark) and founded the Windrush Foundation and an annual celebration for the London immigrant community that became the Notting Hill Carnival.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    Definition of reform - make changes in (something, especially an institution or practice) in order to improve it.

    synonyms of reform: improve, make better, better, ameliorate, refine, mend, rectify, correct, rehabilitate

    as improve is your first (presumably closest example) and that is in my definition why don't we stick with that.

    So yes I believe that the EU could and should be reformed - in my ideal world the only political integration would be to facilitate free trade and that is the ideal that I would like it to move towards. As an example I would scrap CAP because it is a total waste of money.

    We are getting somewhere. Your ideal world is the EU that I want to see and would vote for. I don't have the confidence that it will change though, it had a huge opportunity to do so and rejected it. At some point you have to give up on a failing cause.

    Predictably the French will veto your scrapping of CAP so nothing is going to happen there. Just highlights why it won't change. 28 vested interests.

    I don't see it as failing and there has been a lot of reform of CAP. i don't care about sovereignity so no reason for me to want to leave
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    Coopster the 1st wrote:
    Why do people meddle where they have no idea what they are talking about?

    Boris Johnson’s “vanity” Cycle Superhighways “clogging up” London’s streets, says Bob Geldof

    http://road.cc/content/news/194096-bori ... reets-says

    they come over here moaning about our cycle super highways
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Vote leave board member reigns over anti-Muslim comments.

    No-one is all that surprised.

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... CMP=twt_gu
    _
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    Surrey Commuter wrote:
    I am old enough to remember when some of the same climate change scientists were worried about the next ice age.
    The whole ice age scare was mainly the result of media hype based on a tiny handful of studies, which contradicted the majority opinion. Even if that weren't the case, we have had another 40 years' worth of studies since then, and nobody has uncovered any evidence for a natural cause.
  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,814
    Coopster, have you watched this video? I reckon the guy knows a thing or two about the EU. He talks about dishonesty on an industrial scale and compares some in this debate to creationists denying the theory of evolution.

    Don't say evolution is only a theory or we'll all know you are related to Manc33.
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    Imagine you're in a rainstorm in a tent which has a few leaks, is a slightly strange shape, and a lousy colour scheme. The Remainer says "let's fix the roof". The Leaver says "this is Shiite, I'm sleeping outside".
  • iPete
    iPete Posts: 6,076
    Had a leaflet through my door insinuating that £350million per week would be directed to the NHS if we left (LOL). The same leaflet that's now under threat of legal action from Nissan..
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 91556.html

    Anyway, if one article has nailed how I've felt for the last few weeks, it's this one.
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... help-elite
  • coopster_the_1st
    coopster_the_1st Posts: 5,158
    Veronese68 wrote:
    Coopster, have you watched this video? I reckon the guy knows a thing or two about the EU. He talks about dishonesty on an industrial scale and compares some in this debate to creationists denying the theory of evolution.

    Don't say evolution is only a theory or we'll all know you are related to Manc33.

    Firstly, I have no idea who Manc33 is. I believe in evolution. You have observe a troop of gorillas for a couple of hours to see many human traits on show. Can we put this distraction to bed now? :roll:

    It's the best argument for remaining I have seen. All a bit short term but that is all he sees. It would become opinion if he was forecasting long term but viewed objectively his arguments are strong enough to easily win the referendum for remain, that 'slam dunk' I refer to about the positives of the the EU.

    I agree with him that the UK, alongside Germany & France are the big 3 in Europe. It is why I have the belief that one of these countries has to take the lead on where the EU is going. That it obviously not going to be Germany or France so it is down to Britain again to show leadership in Europe as we are big enough to stand up to the EU bullying rhetoric that is be put out by senior European politicians.

    I realise there will be challenges from leaving as he pointed out but I do believe this is our last chance. A government will never allow another referendum after how risky it has been for them this time. In fact, no individual EU country will allow a referendum going forward and that causes the EU issues as so many further decisions require referendums to be called. I suspect the rules will be changed on this over time so that referenda are not required.

    The question I have that I don't think anyone here can answer is why is this Professor not being put forward by the Remain campaign for any of the debates? Instead he is relegated to Youtube video and they have Frances O'Grady(I had to look him up!) for the BBC one this evening :roll:
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Paul Mason is always good... I do miss him on newsnight.

    Cooper - Nouriel Roubini has come out saying UK will tip into recession post Brexit, and he famously called the '07 credit crunch. Your thoughts?
    _

Categories