BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

bianchimoon

farage at the EU meeting 'negotiating' with the EU members telling them to be sensible and give us a free trade deal without any restrictions, and follows it by telling them " he knows none of them have ever done a days work in their lives" a master negotiator :roll:
just when you thought he couldn't do any more damage

finchy

The Visegrad 4 (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) have already announced that they will veto any EU-UK deal which restricts workers' freedom of movement. So sorry, Mr Goo, leaving the EU doesn't mean that we can stop mass immigration.

florerider

Pross wrote:

but a dispute with the Planning Authority who were making life difficult for them.

been there, done that in the UK too. I have even seen the economic development teams supporting schemes that the planning people oppose.

Stevo_666

Lookyhere wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Lookyhere wrote:

Not really, they have the means and money to wait, we dont,

the tories are in danger of bring this country to its knees, in a way i would never have thought possible and they are the party who are apparently economically competent? jeez.

we need to scrap this vote and start again, the longer we delay this, the more likely we ll go into recession, more and more OUTS are starting to realise that the remain scare stories were not stories.

You miss the point. If another major EU member heads for the door, it's game over for the EU in its current form. While the UK saga drags on, this scenario vecomes more likely. Why do you think they are pushing for a quick split?

In the end this may be beneficial. The EU has no plan B. It will never voluntarily revert to what many in the UK want it to be - a free trade zone. The only way that will happen is if the EU in its current form collapses. It will be painful but in the long run, better. So it would be acting in the national interest to encourage that. A lot of Europeans don't realise it but we would be doing them a favour.

This isnt like fooling around with a labour party leadership election Steve, trying to destabilise mainland europe would be a very stupid thing to do and it isnt why the Tories are delaying article 50, they have no idea what to do and no one least of all that former Remainer Boris wants to trigger it.

Aside from Farage, all the Outers have back pedalled over Brexit and now seem to want a version of our relationship which is very similar as what we ve already got!

its no longer about the EU anymore, we have not even began to talk about leaving and look what is happening to FTSE and currency, longer period of uncertainty is going to make matters far worse - but as i said we need to scrap the brexit vote and start again and i predict, like i did that Brexit will win, that we will, in the end, be forced to do this, the whole country are going see real costs and will demand it.

S&P have just stripped us of our AAA rating, a rating we've held since 1978..... Cameron should be taken to the Tower and charged with treason for what hs has gone and done.

True, it is way more serious.

But on the basis that many on here including yourself appear to have taken the view that because it the referendum result went the wrong way due to people who in your view either didn't understand, then I don't see why we shouldn't look to save Europeans from a Federal Europe - after all in my humble view, they don't understand the issue so we need to sort it for them. A tad Machiavellian maybe, but we have a chance to make Europe more like what we want. Unfortunately this will involve some considerable pain along the way but many will say that it's for the best in the long run.

Maybe I'm thinking way ahead of the politicians, but that's probably a low bar.

veronese68

finchy wrote:

The Visegrad 4 (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) have already announced that they will veto any EU-UK deal which restricts workers' freedom of movement. So sorry, Mr Goo, leaving the EU doesn't mean that we can stop mass immigration.

Even if they hadn't said that it was already a given. Boris has said they won't limit immigration and the referendum wasn't about that anyway, even Farage has said the can't limit immigration. All of their lies are unravelling, but the closet racists are out now as that's what they believe they voted for. Then there are those in plain old fashioned denial looking for the government to fund things with money they don't have.

surrey_commuter

Veronese68 wrote:

finchy wrote:

The Visegrad 4 (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) have already announced that they will veto any EU-UK deal which restricts workers' freedom of movement. So sorry, Mr Goo, leaving the EU doesn't mean that we can stop mass immigration.

Even if they hadn't said that it was already a given. Boris has said they won't limit immigration and the referendum wasn't about that anyway, even Farage has said the can't limit immigration. All of their lies are unravelling, but the closet racists are out now as that's what they believe they voted for. Then there are those in plain old fashioned denial looking for the government to fund things with money they don't have.

sometimes it makes me want to laugh...it is like some shit Eddie Murphy film from the 1980s when two very rich chaps have a $1 bet over whether one of them can get enough idiots to vote for leaving the EU.

Then I look around me and realise that the punchline is probably, and I quote an expert, "worse than you think"

surrey_commuter

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

pangolin

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

I don't think killing old people is the answer, somehow.

finchy

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

Can you spare my grandad, please? He voted in and described the leave vote as "bloody idiocy".

surrey_commuter

pangolin wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

I don't think killing old people is the answer, somehow.

Ok - let's make winter fuel and bus passes taxable... That should avoid killing anybody.

coopster_the_1st

pangolin wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

I don't think killing old people is the answer, somehow.

I'm glad there are still some voices of reason on this forum rather than just the ones that worry how padded their wallets are with £50 notes

bendertherobot

Coopster the 1st wrote:

pangolin wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

I don't think killing old people is the answer, somehow.

I'm glad there are still some voices of reason on this forum rather than just the ones that worry how padded their wallets are with £50 notes

I'm glad that there are still some posting humour.

finchy

Veronese68 wrote:

finchy wrote:

The Visegrad 4 (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) have already announced that they will veto any EU-UK deal which restricts workers' freedom of movement. So sorry, Mr Goo, leaving the EU doesn't mean that we can stop mass immigration.

Even if they hadn't said that it was already a given. Boris has said they won't limit immigration and the referendum wasn't about that anyway, even Farage has said the can't limit immigration. All of their lies are unravelling, but the closet racists are out now as that's what they believe they voted for. Then there are those in plain old fashioned denial looking for the government to fund things with money they don't have.

Yes, I knew it was a given that poorer countries wouldn't want their most highly skilled workers creamed off, but now there is some concrete evidence of this, seeing as Mr Goo still keeps going on about mass immigration from the EU as if somehow it would all come to an end now.

joelsim

finchy wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

finchy wrote:

The Visegrad 4 (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) have already announced that they will veto any EU-UK deal which restricts workers' freedom of movement. So sorry, Mr Goo, leaving the EU doesn't mean that we can stop mass immigration.

Even if they hadn't said that it was already a given. Boris has said they won't limit immigration and the referendum wasn't about that anyway, even Farage has said the can't limit immigration. All of their lies are unravelling, but the closet racists are out now as that's what they believe they voted for. Then there are those in plain old fashioned denial looking for the government to fund things with money they don't have.

Yes, I knew it was a given that poorer countries wouldn't want their most highly skilled workers creamed off, but now there is some concrete evidence of this, seeing as Mr Goo still keeps going on about mass immigration from the EU as if somehow it would all come to an end now.

Who is this Mr Magoo that people keep mentioning?

pangolin

Coopster the 1st wrote:

pangolin wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

I don't think killing old people is the answer, somehow.

I'm glad there are still some voices of reason on this forum rather than just the ones that worry how padded their wallets are with £50 notes

Goodness, please don't take my suggestion that we shouldn't kill off the elderly as any kind of endorsement of your views by association. It is not.

coopster_the_1st

pangolin wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

pangolin wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

I don't think killing old people is the answer, somehow.

I'm glad there are still some voices of reason on this forum rather than just the ones that worry how padded their wallets are with £50 notes

Goodness, please don't take my suggestion that we shouldn't kill off the elderly as any kind of endorsement of your views by association. It is not.

I never made that suggestion but was pleased to hear a much more moderated and sensible language on this forum

We are all against racism but some here are happy to support ageism via means of financial punishment without being rebuked :roll:

finchy

Coopster, new word for you to look up in the dictionary - facetious.

joelsim

pangolin wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

pangolin wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Given that Osborne's post referendum speech said there will be tax rises and further cuts if we were to leave the EU, wouldn't the sensible thing to do be to just impose tax rises to cover the shortfall on Leave voters?

Hit pensioners and hit them hard. Cutting the winter fuel allowance and free bus passes would save £2.5bn. Then merge NI and income tax and put them on the same tax allowances as the rest of us, that should get us another £3bn.

I don't think killing old people is the answer, somehow.

I'm glad there are still some voices of reason on this forum rather than just the ones that worry how padded their wallets are with £50 notes

Goodness, please don't take my suggestion that we shouldn't kill off the elderly as any kind of endorsement of your views by association. It is not.

All I can say here Coopster is that your voting preference will be the one that really bites the old and the less well-off hardest. Their benefits will be cut further, they will have less chance of employment, pension values have already been hit and will go down further, no EU grants for less wealthy areas and so on and on and on. Unless we can find a money tree to make up the shortfall.

Not in my name thanks.

joenobody

Coopster the 1st wrote:

We are all against racism but some here are happy to support ageism via means of financial punishment without being rebuked :roll:

I don't think anyone, SC included, supports that. It was pretty clear it was a tongue in cheek remark. Of course, I may be wrong, and I'd be happy for SC to correct me if I am.

Jez mon

I'm sure it was tongue in cheek, but a part of me does think that if cuts have to made due to voting out, it's only fair that the demographics who voted out bear their share of the brunt...

Although we'll probably just raise tuition fees again, and **** over the generation who didn't even get a chance to vote in this sorry affair.

coopster_the_1st

JoeNobody wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

We are all against racism but some here are happy to support ageism via means of financial punishment without being rebuked :roll:

I don't think anyone, SC included, supports that. It was pretty clear it was a tongue in cheek remark. Of course, I may be wrong, and I'd be happy for SC to correct me if I am.

SC has been very forthright in expressing this view. He has made it many times already on this thread. As well as punishing the poor because they voted against his view with whatever tax or benefit mechanism that is in the hands of the government.

Saying it once could be tongue in cheek, repeating it many times is obviously a view he holds.

bompington

Coopster - can you please, please, please try using this forum to refute, rather than confirm, the view that Leavers aren't all that clever?

finchy

Jez mon wrote:

I'm sure it was tongue in cheek, but a part of me does think that if cuts have to made due to voting out, it's only fair that the demographics who voted out bear their share of the brunt...

Although we'll probably just raise tuition fees again, and **** over the generation who didn't even get a chance to vote in this sorry affair.

Depressingly, I believe this.

coopster_the_1st

bompington wrote:

Coopster - can you please, please, please try using this forum to refute, rather than confirm, the view that Leavers aren't all that clever?

I called SC out for ageism. In the same way anyone would be called out for racism or xenophobia if a post was made with that view. Why are we rightfully, active in denouncing one but are happy to let the other keep being pushed, with no-one calling it out?

finchy

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bompington wrote:

Coopster - can you please, please, please try using this forum to refute, rather than confirm, the view that Leavers aren't all that clever?

I called SC out for ageism. In the same way anyone would be called out for racism or xenophobia if a post was made with that view. Why are we rightfully, active in denouncing one but are happy to let the other keep being pushed, with no-one calling it out?

Because the rest of us recognise when somebody is not being entirely serious.

veronese68

finchy wrote:

Because the rest of us recognise when somebody is not being entirely serious.

Or when a campaign is based on a tissue of lies.

Lookyhere

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bompington wrote:

Coopster - can you please, please, please try using this forum to refute, rather than confirm, the view that Leavers aren't all that clever?

I called SC out for ageism. In the same way anyone would be called out for racism or xenophobia if a post was made with that view. Why are we rightfully, active in denouncing one but are happy to let the other keep being pushed, with no-one calling it out?

Explain why the middle income earner should solely bare the brunt of tax rises, spending cuts, seeing THEIR hard earned company pensions reduce in value whilst the pension triple lock, winter fuel, bus passes and social benefits remain untouched?

We were told VERY clearly the dangers of voting out but people like you and 'Goo, held to a dream of Spitfires and a warm pint around the village green, whilst the all english and white cricket team bang out a few runs.

to me the answer is simple, revoke the referendum vote, on the basis it is not in the national interest and call a GE, any party that then wants to continue with this madness can then stuff it in their manifesto and we can elect a new Government based on what we know will happen.

tbh i d prefer a tory gov for the next 5 years on a pro IN ticket than what will happen if we carry-on this path to destruction, i never thought i d ever say that!

Pross

Did I miss the referendum where we opted out of having a sense of humour or is part of our exit deal that we had to pass our sense of humour over to the Germans?

veronese68

Pross wrote:

Did I miss the referendum where we opted out of having a sense of humour or is part of our exit deal that we had to pass our sense of humour over to the Germans?

They are so busy fending off the flack for getting us into the almighty shitstorm and justifying their votes that they can't cope with humour as well. I'm sure they will blame others for us getting into this mess but lets be perfectly clear it's down to the 52% of voters that agreed to it as much as it's down to the self serving fucknuggets that headed up the leave campaign.

florerider

Don't worry, the blonde baboon is the unity candidate, we are all saved.