BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

ddraver

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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:

I suspect I can.He looks at the debates on QT, Nigel Farage and wherever else and thinks, "Sod that for a laugh!You wouldnt get me on that in a million years".

Richard Dawkins' comment along the lines of, "that would look very good on your CV, not so good on mine" comes to mind...

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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:

He answers that question... being an expert in this debate is seen as a negative. You can hear the emotion in his voice when he refers to the way his opinion is dismissed as irrelevant because he is an expert.

Maybe he would not want to be on a panel with a bunch of morons catcalling as he stated his qualifications and then kept shouting "what about Turkey"

bendertherobot

iPete wrote:

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

Nissan are very very upset about this. Very naughty by leave.

Question for the day:

Farage et al describe the WTO most favoured nation option as the worst case scenario but, it appears to me, that the worst case scenario is the only one that actually frees up the entire £350 million per week. It's the only option that requires us to pay nothing.

The other options such as Swiss, Norway models, will cost money if we can't amend/get a different/better deal. So how is this addressed. By implication of saying worst case are leave being duplicitious once again in the £350m figure?

kingstongraham

Coopster the 1st wrote:

they have Frances O'Grady(I had to look him up!) for the BBC one this evening :roll:

Where did you look "him" up? It isn't Paul O'Grady.

veronese68

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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.

But leaving isn't showing leadership, it's having a hissy fit, spitting the dummy, throwing your toys and stomping out never to be allowed back in. Or at least not with such favourable terms.
Showing leadership would be to stay in and try to change things for the better.

bendertherobot

If we're one of the big 3, this massive, amazing, strong nation, how come we keep getting bullied? Or are we getting bullied?

gaffer_slow

persecution complex combined with a sense of entitlement.

just like the bloody immigrants /s

coopster_the_1st

Rick Chasey wrote:

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?

If you are referring to the same Paul Mason I saw on QT the other month then he seemed to be contradicting himself an added nothing to the panel

I see he has entered the Brexit debate. Did he use the word will or could when referring to a possible recession?

veronese68

Interesting piece about when BoJo was a journalist in Brussells here. Hardly surprising though.

coopster_the_1st

ddraver wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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:

I suspect I can.He looks at the debates on QT, Nigel Farage and wherever else and thinks, "Sod that for a laugh!You wouldnt get me on that in a million years".

Richard Dawkins' comment along the lines of, "that would look very good on your CV, not so good on mine" comes to mind...

Surrey Commuter wrote:

He answers that question... being an expert in this debate is seen as a negative. You can hear the emotion in his voice when he refers to the way his opinion is dismissed as irrelevant because he is an expert.

Maybe he would not want to be on a panel with a bunch of morons catcalling as he stated his qualifications and then kept shouting "what about Turkey"

Not really a huge endorsement of how destructive leaving the EU is meant to be if he is prepared to put his CV ahead of the country.

I've only ever known experts or members of the public who expose politicians lying to be a good thing. It certainly enhances their reputation. He is getting a positive reputation already via Youtube


One point I have read about his statements is:

He said that Brexit would "require" a fundamental review of the UK legal system and leaving would require constitutional change despite the fact that he reiterated the view that the UK was completely sovereign within the EU which seems contradictory.

So are Westminster in full control of our laws or are there many dictated by the EU that we then have to pass into UK law?

coopster_the_1st

Veronese68 wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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.

But leaving isn't showing leadership, it's having a hissy fit, spitting the dummy, throwing your toys and stomping out never to be allowed back in. Or at least not with such favourable terms.
Showing leadership would be to stay in and try to change things for the better.

We keep being told this. Time for the remainers to step up.

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

bendertherobot

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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.

But leaving isn't showing leadership, it's having a hissy fit, spitting the dummy, throwing your toys and stomping out never to be allowed back in. Or at least not with such favourable terms.
Showing leadership would be to stay in and try to change things for the better.

We keep being told this. Time for the remainers to step up.

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

Hope. Hope and belief in this great country's ability to be a powerhouse of influence. Hope that things can be changed for the better. Hope that we can come together as one for the common good. It's time to stop being negative and think that we can't change our destiny. We need to be positive, be a force for good and change. We can do this. Don't be fearful. Be hopeful. Vote remain.

See, that's an easy one to use from either side

rick_chasey

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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.

But leaving isn't showing leadership, it's having a hissy fit, spitting the dummy, throwing your toys and stomping out never to be allowed back in. Or at least not with such favourable terms.
Showing leadership would be to stay in and try to change things for the better.

We keep being told this. Time for the remainers to step up.

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

Eugh. For the last time. It's a choice for 'status quo' or 'something different'. It's literally in the word 'remain'.
definition:
Remain: verb
- to continue to exist
- to continue to possess a particular quality

rick_chasey

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

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?

I see he has entered the Brexit debate. Did he use the word will or could when referring to a possible recession?

https://twitter.com/Nouriel/status/745085692837978115

Brexit would cause significant damage to the UK economy & to the employment & well being of Britons. The UK is much better off inside the EU

finchy

Coopster the 1st wrote:

We keep being told this. Time for the remainers to step up.

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

We aren't expecting things to improve if we vote remain. We expect things to get worse if we vote leave.

Seeing as analogies are the order of the day on this thread, if I were to stand on top of a tall building, I would not expect things to improve by remaining there. If, however, I jumped over the edge, I would expect things to get significantly worse.

bendertherobot

https://www.facebook.com/notes/newsthum ... 2031828566

Very very good piece.

veronese68

Coopster the 1st wrote:

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

What proof/evidence is there that leaving will change things for the better?
As has been said many times it is almost certain there will be a short term downturn, but you can't prove it as it hasn't happened yet. Long term is harder to predict which is why people are talking short term.

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

ddraver wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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:

I suspect I can.He looks at the debates on QT, Nigel Farage and wherever else and thinks, "Sod that for a laugh!You wouldnt get me on that in a million years".

Richard Dawkins' comment along the lines of, "that would look very good on your CV, not so good on mine" comes to mind...

Surrey Commuter wrote:

He answers that question... being an expert in this debate is seen as a negative. You can hear the emotion in his voice when he refers to the way his opinion is dismissed as irrelevant because he is an expert.

Maybe he would not want to be on a panel with a bunch of morons catcalling as he stated his qualifications and then kept shouting "what about Turkey"

Not really a huge endorsement of how destructive leaving the EU is meant to be if he is prepared to put his CV ahead of the country.

I've only ever known experts or members of the public who expose politicians lying to be a good thing. It certainly enhances their reputation. He is getting a positive reputation already via Youtube


One point I have read about his statements is:

He said that Brexit would "require" a fundamental review of the UK legal system and leaving would require constitutional change despite the fact that he reiterated the view that the UK was completely sovereign within the EU which seems contradictory.

So are Westminster in full control of our laws or are there many dictated by the EU that we then have to pass into UK law?

There you go - he would be wasting his time. He would be condemned for being an expert and then people would veer off at a tangent and start nit-picking over minor legal points about which they have no understanding.

Perhaps Bender could explain it to us

coopster_the_1st

Rick Chasey wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

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?

I see he has entered the Brexit debate. Did he use the word will or could when referring to a possible recession?

https://twitter.com/Nouriel/status/745085692837978115

Brexit would cause significant damage to the UK economy & to the employment & well being of Britons. The UK is much better off inside the EU

That is a different tweet to the message you originally wrote and does not mention recession. You were and still are trying to confuse two separate statements and you know this.

If you want a balanced debate you have to come across as credible which with the above you are not

coopster_the_1st

Rick Chasey wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

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.

But leaving isn't showing leadership, it's having a hissy fit, spitting the dummy, throwing your toys and stomping out never to be allowed back in. Or at least not with such favourable terms.
Showing leadership would be to stay in and try to change things for the better.

We keep being told this. Time for the remainers to step up.

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

Eugh. For the last time. It's a choice for 'status quo' or 'something different'. It's literally in the word 'remain'.
definition:
Remain: verb
- to continue to exist
- to continue to possess a particular quality

You are being seriously misled if you think remaining is going to mean a status quo otherwise why would every remainer want to reform it as the 'status quo' is not good enough

coopster_the_1st

bendertherobot wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

We keep being told this. Time for the remainers to step up.

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

Hope. Hope and belief in this great country's ability to be a powerhouse of influence. Hope that things can be changed for the better. Hope that we can come together as one for the common good. It's time to stop being negative and think that we can't change our destiny. We need to be positive, be a force for good and change. We can do this. Don't be fearful. Be hopeful. Vote remain.

See, that's an easy one to use from either side

But we have been a member for 40+ years. The evidence should be overwhelming

ddraver

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Not really a huge endorsement of how destructive leaving the EU is meant to be if he is prepared to put his CV ahead of the country.

That's pathetic mate, well beneath you.

Coopster the 1st wrote:

I've only ever known experts or members of the public who expose politicians lying to be a good thing. It certainly enhances their reputation. He is getting a positive reputation already via Youtube

So why ruin that positive reputation by entering a bear pit where facts are optional and in Michal Gove's case, actively discouraged?

bendertherobot

Sovereignty is absolute. You can do what you want at any time ever. That means writing rubbish law and giving part of your law making away. Sovereignty in the UK is a bit of a red herring. Remember that the "UK" has already "given away" law making powers to the devolved administrations. But the clue there is the word devolved. Sovereignty hasn't been given away, it's just been given to someone else to run with. At any point the Westminster Parliament could pull the lot down because it is supreme and sovereign.

The Uk (including the devolved administrations) still create law (and policy) in pretty much every single every day thing. Health, education, welfare, tax (mostly), monetary policy, border control and defence.

You can have a debate on the true nature of Sovereignty all day long. But, there's nothing in the EU which has ever truly impinged on it. This referendum is the result of Sovereignty and, of course, democracy. We have the power to repeal the EC Act. No state lacking a sovereign power could do that.

Sovereignty is also subject to constraints. In theory Parliament could legislate in relation to the moon. Such a law would never work. So it does not. It could legislate to kill all first born. It controls itself.

Our nation is both Sovereign and democratic. And, by transferrence, what we do with the EU is the same.

Have we given something away? Yes. We choose to allow the EU to deal with issues which, democratically, we believe are issues in relation to a common good. That's not an abandonment of sovereignty, it's a realistic and practical effect of our membership.

And references to the EU are unhelpful. We don't give away powers to the EU. We are the EU with the other member states. We're there at the table making these decisions. We're in the Council. We're in the Commission. We're in the Parliament. The only place we seem under represented is in the Fisheries committee where one of our MEP's just doesn't turn up.

Look, you could write books on this. It's a long and complex subject. There's no doubt we're a Sovereign nation and truly great Sovereign nations realise that to prosper sharing some of its powers with other like minded nations is a pretty good thing to do.

bendertherobot

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

We keep being told this. Time for the remainers to step up.

What proof/evidence is there that remaining will change things for the better?

Hope. Hope and belief in this great country's ability to be a powerhouse of influence. Hope that things can be changed for the better. Hope that we can come together as one for the common good. It's time to stop being negative and think that we can't change our destiny. We need to be positive, be a force for good and change. We can do this. Don't be fearful. Be hopeful. Vote remain.

See, that's an easy one to use from either side

But we have been a member for 40+ years. The evidence should be overwhelming

The evidence is there. Evidence is nothing without evaluation.

rick_chasey

bendertherobot

Well, I sense it's game over now. Clarkson and May are in.

finchy

And David Beckham. Don't forget David Beckham

coopster_the_1st

bendertherobot wrote:

At any point the Westminster Parliament could pull the lot down because it is supreme and sovereign.

Agree to the above.

Ignoring the referendum, what would the legal ramifications be if Westminster implemented a law saying the UK now has an Australian points immigration system for both EU and non-EU migrants?

bendertherobot

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bendertherobot wrote:

At any point the Westminster Parliament could pull the lot down because it is supreme and sovereign.

Agree to the above.

Ignoring the referendum, what would the legal ramifications be if Westminster implemented a law saying the UK now has an Australian points immigration system for both EU and non-EU migrants?

You know what the answer is to that the question is whether you believe that impacts on what sovereignty means.

bendertherobot

https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/file ... -final.pdf

That's a pretty good read on Sovereignty.