By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
OUT WITH A DEAL EATING OUR CAKE AND LOVING IT suck it up remoaners
And like a typical anti democracy remoaner he decided the will of the people should be ignored the minute the democratic result was in total fecking hypocrite 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Despite it being voted in to law by the commons the spineless two faced remoaner MPs have totally abandoned any morals and decided to ignore the will of the British people.
It will be remembered and no election or referendum will ever be the same again in this country.
The one thing that will come is a massive surge in the popularity of UKIP or a similar party in the future who stand for the 52%.
Happy Days.
[Post edited 1 Jan 2021 14:13]
OUT AFLI SUCK IT UP REMOANER LOSERS
🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧 🇬🇧
The Countdown begins. on 17:55 - Mar 12 by PozuelosSideys
I know that and you know that as we are comfortable in our understanding of the potential financial outcomes (or at least how these scenarios are put together, modelled and then slapped up on the powerpoint deck).
I honestly believe people are more concerned with the cultural changes and the way society is moving a whole. Not only does the UK create jobs for the British, but its also creating jobs for large numbers of Europeans and Non EU immigrants. This keeps the wages down, keeps working conditions from improving and most certainly means companies will not educate or develop skillsets at the lower end as they know they can just bin the employee off and hire somebody else back in from elsewhere for a lower number. But of course, we cant have this conversation as it gets shouted down for being racist, xenophobic, gender blah blah etc
We can argue about what we get from "taking back control", but flip that and what are the people at the lower ends of the pay scale and soceity getting from the current status quo within the EU? The agenda is being set by the media, the politicians and "the elite" from London who are middling to upper earners and arent struggling. They wouldnt have a clue what goes through the minds of the masses. Not a single clue how John from the production line, living on the Townhill estate struggles. Brexit is a big role of the dice from the people as they simply arent being heard.
Anyway, when all this settles down, the first thing that needs to happen is the BBC needs to no longer be taxpayer funded. It needs to stand alone - its not fit for purpose. Some of the interpretations on the Business section alone today is staggeringly poor, alarming even.
Gone off on a tangent a bit there, but you then get these knobs talking about Blue Passports and the like - as if a single person voted on an item like that.
Its frightening as to the levels plumbed by all sides here from those who have influence. Before this, many of us on here alone hoped for a balanced, reasoned dabate. What we got as soon as the Ref was announced was a kids tea party with jelly and ice cream dribbling down the walls.
Fcking idiots. Rant over :)
Edit: i mused with Shaky about models recently too. But we both know there are multiple scenarios planned in these models. Worse case scenarios will always be pushed as headline news in order to maintain credibility for those delivering. If its wrong, its forgotten and old news. If they provide positive scenarios and its correct, nobody cares - just doing their job. But produce positive scenarios and theyre wrong - there goes credibility. Its cherry picked outputs. (and yes, i moan about this to my bosses too!) Agenda setting..
[Post edited 12 Mar 2019 17:59]
I don’t disagree with the impact on lower paid British workers of immigration (albeit, see my final note in the flip side of that).
Where I disagree is that I think people thinking Brexit will result in an improvement is a false argument for two reasons:
- if somebody is rightly concerned about the effect of mass immigration on their pay and conditions, there is an underlying assumption being made that the removal of that immigration will result in better pay and conditions, not that the job will be lost completely due to their employer upping sticks.
- the prime pushers of Brexit (on the right at least) are not even slightly concerned about workers’ pay and conditions. They want a removal of protection not increased protection. The workers from Poland, Bulgaria etc will be replaced by those from India, Bangladesh, China. Which will result in even worse pay and conditions. The NHS will not be improved by more money, it’ll be decimated by us having to give up contracts to US firms in return for a trade deal.
So while I agree with the concerns, the effect of this will make things worse not better. At least in the medium term.
On the ‘flip side’ point I mentioned up top, the impacts of globalisation work both ways. On one hand there’s an impact on pay and conditions, but on the other hand, people seem to want to buy huge quantities of TVs, computers, white goods, clothes, food in supermarkets etc cheap as chips. People can’t have it all - if they want, for example, TVs manufactured in the UK, with staff paid decent amounts, they’ll have to accept that means they cost more. And you change them less. And have them repaired, same as we used to when I was young.
3
The Countdown begins. on 18:32 - Mar 12 with 1512 views
The Countdown begins. on 18:13 - Mar 12 by londonlisa2001
I don’t disagree with the impact on lower paid British workers of immigration (albeit, see my final note in the flip side of that).
Where I disagree is that I think people thinking Brexit will result in an improvement is a false argument for two reasons:
- if somebody is rightly concerned about the effect of mass immigration on their pay and conditions, there is an underlying assumption being made that the removal of that immigration will result in better pay and conditions, not that the job will be lost completely due to their employer upping sticks.
- the prime pushers of Brexit (on the right at least) are not even slightly concerned about workers’ pay and conditions. They want a removal of protection not increased protection. The workers from Poland, Bulgaria etc will be replaced by those from India, Bangladesh, China. Which will result in even worse pay and conditions. The NHS will not be improved by more money, it’ll be decimated by us having to give up contracts to US firms in return for a trade deal.
So while I agree with the concerns, the effect of this will make things worse not better. At least in the medium term.
On the ‘flip side’ point I mentioned up top, the impacts of globalisation work both ways. On one hand there’s an impact on pay and conditions, but on the other hand, people seem to want to buy huge quantities of TVs, computers, white goods, clothes, food in supermarkets etc cheap as chips. People can’t have it all - if they want, for example, TVs manufactured in the UK, with staff paid decent amounts, they’ll have to accept that means they cost more. And you change them less. And have them repaired, same as we used to when I was young.
Why would the employer up sticks? The UK simply has to implement a more strategic and rounded immigration policy. Limit inbounds to roles and sectors we require. We have had these powers for years in terms of limiting numbers, but the Government never used them.. now none of them will have the balls to do so for fear of being labelled racist etc. This is an ideal opportunity to change things. We have seen already that pay levels have started to creep up as immigration levels decrease in the last 12 months. Its no coincidence that scarcity of labour means companies are forced to pay higher market rates. But, i will conceed that this is as much about 2008 as it is immigration levels - but both play their part. The UK is still very much world leading in terms of a place to do business, despite what the whining self-haters amongst us say. That will continue when this mess dies down. The EU simply has no desire to reform. Hell, Macron cant even make any basic changes to their social benefit structures. The UK will continue to create jobs. Albeit any rebalancing of the economy may be painful.
The NHS will never be improved as its an absolute financial disaster and any private company being operated that way will have been out of businesses years ago. People need to understand that they will need to fund it through increased taxes or it will have to become privitised - it was never designed for this many people. (obviously the NHS does a wonderful job on an operational level, and there are many susperstars within it - id much rather a small tax increase than the American model).
The last paragraph makes me chuckle. I was waiting for my food to turn up the other day as was thinking what you wrote almost word for word. The irony is that those people making the decisions and pushing the agenda are the ones wanting the low prices as they are well off. Those creating the goods are the poor who want higher wages. The system is turning society against itself and i dont know what the answer to that is.
People need to understand - Everyone can be a loser. But when there are winners, there must be some losers by definition. However, not everyone can be a winner.
"Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper."
The Countdown begins. on 17:17 - Mar 12 by union_jack
Yes, but leave on what terms? Remain takes care of itself.
The only two options realistically, discounting Canada+ or Norway++, is No Deal or May’s Deal.
The second vote is essentially problematic as you say because there are a number of leave options. Even if we had a GE the parties would be split. MPs not up to developing strategy and plans I'm afraid, just voicing their own opinion.
The Countdown begins. on 18:42 - Mar 12 by JACKMANANDBOY
The second vote is essentially problematic as you say because there are a number of leave options. Even if we had a GE the parties would be split. MPs not up to developing strategy and plans I'm afraid, just voicing their own opinion.
Only the government could negotiate so only the government could develop strategies and plans. This is a failure of government, not parliament. The Commons is doing what it’s there to do - holding the government to account.
The Countdown begins. on 18:52 - Mar 12 by exiledclaseboy
Only the government could negotiate so only the government could develop strategies and plans. This is a failure of government, not parliament. The Commons is doing what it’s there to do - holding the government to account.
[Post edited 12 Mar 2019 19:32]
The Commons is doing what it’s there to do - holding the government to account and upholding the will of the people they're there to represent.
The Countdown begins. on 18:52 - Mar 12 by exiledclaseboy
Only the government could negotiate so only the government could develop strategies and plans. This is a failure of government, not parliament. The Commons is doing what it’s there to do - holding the government to account.
[Post edited 12 Mar 2019 19:32]
My view is following a referendum parliament's job is to deliver the outcome. Today I hear MPs advocating remain, 2nd vote and a GE. Collectively they are more interested in their factional positions than doing what the electorate voted for. I voted remain but this has been a failure of parliament as a whole. Last night Starmer said to Liddington I have not seen the papers and we have not had the AG's legal advice but Labour will vote against the deal anyway. Both parties have proved themselves incapable.
The Countdown begins. on 19:23 - Mar 12 by JACKMANANDBOY
My view is following a referendum parliament's job is to deliver the outcome. Today I hear MPs advocating remain, 2nd vote and a GE. Collectively they are more interested in their factional positions than doing what the electorate voted for. I voted remain but this has been a failure of parliament as a whole. Last night Starmer said to Liddington I have not seen the papers and we have not had the AG's legal advice but Labour will vote against the deal anyway. Both parties have proved themselves incapable.
[Post edited 12 Mar 2019 19:24]
Parliament can only vote on what the government presents it to vote on. I don’t agree with you on parliament’s role. It misunderstands how our system works. But I fully agree that both main parties have proved themselves incompetent. But it’s the government that keeps presenting a deal that it knows doesn’t command a majority. May has now stated that her party will be allowed a free vote on tomorrow’s motion to rule out no deal. That’s purely because she knows her party would ignore her en masses if she tried to whip them. Yet again May’s first action is protect the Tory party, not the country.
I think the free vote would be the only way to go tomorrow anyway.
If "leave with no deal" is rejected, then there's the farcical situation that those who voted for Article 50 knowing the default was WTO rules now completely ignoring that.
Assuming parliament votes against "leaving with no deal ( whilst having no fvcking clue what they really want )", can that even be implemented? Would EU accept that being unilaterally changed, requiring an extension with no clue as to way forward? EU won't want an extension leading into middle to MEP elections.
0
The Countdown begins. on 19:39 - Mar 12 with 1416 views
The Countdown begins. on 19:37 - Mar 12 by bluey_the_blue
I think the free vote would be the only way to go tomorrow anyway.
If "leave with no deal" is rejected, then there's the farcical situation that those who voted for Article 50 knowing the default was WTO rules now completely ignoring that.
Assuming parliament votes against "leaving with no deal ( whilst having no fvcking clue what they really want )", can that even be implemented? Would EU accept that being unilaterally changed, requiring an extension with no clue as to way forward? EU won't want an extension leading into middle to MEP elections.
May has said the extension comes with a need to inform the EU of whether the desire is for a second referendum or revoking article 50 altogether according to the newsfeed.
The Countdown begins. on 19:31 - Mar 12 by exiledclaseboy
Parliament can only vote on what the government presents it to vote on. I don’t agree with you on parliament’s role. It misunderstands how our system works. But I fully agree that both main parties have proved themselves incompetent. But it’s the government that keeps presenting a deal that it knows doesn’t command a majority. May has now stated that her party will be allowed a free vote on tomorrow’s motion to rule out no deal. That’s purely because she knows her party would ignore her en masses if she tried to whip them. Yet again May’s first action is protect the Tory party, not the country.
[Post edited 12 Mar 2019 21:41]
The problem is that there is no deal realistically speaking that will attract a majority.
Of course, if the EU gave us everything and we gave them nothing, it may just get through. But that’s not going to happen.
It’s about time now that the second referendum is taken seriously and discussed as a realistic option going forward.
The Countdown begins. on 19:43 - Mar 12 by exiledclaseboy
Fair point. Strasbourg this week.
I shall cherish the moment you claimed I had a fair point and throw that back at you the next time you bitchily but accurately rip my posts to shreds...
0
The Countdown begins. on 19:45 - Mar 12 with 1380 views
The Countdown begins. on 19:42 - Mar 12 by monmouth
May has said the extension comes with a need to inform the EU of whether the desire is for a second referendum or revoking article 50 altogether according to the newsfeed.
No deal vote tomorrow. If no deal is rejected (it will be) the vote to extend A50 will be on Thursday.
She’s actually sticking to what she said she’d do. A first.
So if there is a requirement to inform the EU as to the intent behind any extension, we should know at that point whether the whole thing is called off and therefore prepare for the incoming shitstorm, or we should know what the question would be on the referendum ballot paper.
However, how can you have anything on the ballot paper other than remain? No deal will have probably been taken off the table by then and the "final" offer by the EU has just been voted down by the UK
"Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper."
The Countdown begins. on 19:31 - Mar 12 by exiledclaseboy
Parliament can only vote on what the government presents it to vote on. I don’t agree with you on parliament’s role. It misunderstands how our system works. But I fully agree that both main parties have proved themselves incompetent. But it’s the government that keeps presenting a deal that it knows doesn’t command a majority. May has now stated that her party will be allowed a free vote on tomorrow’s motion to rule out no deal. That’s purely because she knows her party would ignore her en masses if she tried to whip them. Yet again May’s first action is protect the Tory party, not the country.
[Post edited 12 Mar 2019 21:41]
I agree that party politics takes priority on both sides, both sides have factions and no clear majority.
The Countdown begins. on 19:44 - Mar 12 by union_jack
The problem is that there is no deal realistically speaking that will attract a majority.
Of course, if the EU gave us everything and we gave them nothing, it may just get through. But that’s not going to happen.
It’s about time now that the second referendum is taken seriously and discussed as a realistic option going forward.
Agree fully. Almost. I think a much softer Brexit which includes staying in the customs union will get a majority. But the government won’t countenance it.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
