|
Post by Albion on Oct 16, 2016 8:01:54 GMT
You wouldn't be Lisa Marie Trump one of the mods (or ex-mods?) on CWDF would you by any chance. The ranting doom laden prophesies sound just like some of the FB entries by that person? Roger Well, that last big long post by "Emma" is actually a copy and paste from a Sunday Times OpEd by Mathew Parris. Yep, I know. I read it and survived right to the end where the attribution is stated. Roger
|
|
|
Post by emma on Oct 16, 2016 8:17:25 GMT
Contradictory stupidity? The electorate were asked to make a choice. In or Out. We're not asked to study for a degree in economics or politics before doing it. We say, out - sort it. If you don't sort it, you will go under. Pragmatism. Any idealistic ambitions that I may have had, as possible ways the EU could function, have been totally junked by economic imperatives that govern the EU. It's almost like coming to the conclusion that I don't believe in god. No faith in the EU. We've thrown down the gauntlet, saying - tackle this, because you sure as hell haven't been following a script that makes sense to me. Relate hasn't worked, in an effort to avert the divorce. The councillor tends to be dictatorial and offensive. .... snipped to avoid repeating the waffle The Higgsian economic model is not really based on anything other than quaffing a pint and pontificating though is it? The people who voted out voted for a lot of things, almost none of them to do with our relationship with our 500 million strong neighbours 22 miles away. We can't change the EU from outside, we could change it from inside. We could even control <shock-horror>immigration</shock-horror> See Lichtenstein. We need a trading relationship with Europe we need to import Spanish and Dutch food, we need to export cars. We will now be doing that from a position of extreme weakness. What does an EU-less Britain offer? Not very much. With our historical reputation (now a laughing stock) we were able to punch high above our weight at the European table. I am looking at the effect now. If there was another referendum, today, you know, just as I do, it would be overwhelmingly the other way. The lunatics are in the kitchen, the three Brexiteers are failed politicians whose careers were over before this and frankly, I wouldn't trust them to put up a gazebo, let alone forge the difficult and complex deals that are needed to salvage anything from this mess. I repeat my call; All the things I have illustrated in my last few posts are reality. They are now. What is going to change? When is it going to change? How is it going to change?
|
|
|
Post by emma on Oct 16, 2016 8:20:36 GMT
Haven't even started on this....
But then I get the feeling that most on here would have no sympathy for her.
Perhaps, if Thunderbolt is to get some wider respect, that tide might turn.
Extremism has no place in my Britain. I spend a chunk of the late 70s and early 80s fighting this kind of stuff with Rock Against Racism. Seems we're needed again.
|
|
|
Post by Higgs on Oct 16, 2016 8:28:11 GMT
Contradictory stupidity? The electorate were asked to make a choice. In or Out. We're not asked to study for a degree in economics or politics before doing it. We say, out - sort it. If you don't sort it, you will go under. Pragmatism. Any idealistic ambitions that I may have had, as possible ways the EU could function, have been totally junked by economic imperatives that govern the EU. It's almost like coming to the conclusion that I don't believe in god. No faith in the EU. We've thrown down the gauntlet, saying - tackle this, because you sure as hell haven't been following a script that makes sense to me. Relate hasn't worked, in an effort to avert the divorce. The councillor tends to be dictatorial and offensive. .... snipped to avoid repeating the waffle The Higgsian economic model is not really based on anything other than quaffing a pint and pontificating though is it? The people who voted out voted for a lot of things, almost none of them to do with our relationship with our 500 million strong neighbours 22 miles away. We can't change the EU from outside, we could change it from inside. We could even control <shock-horror>immigration</shock-horror> See Lichtenstein. We need a trading relationship with Europe we need to import Spanish and Dutch food, we need to export cars. We will now be doing that from a position of extreme weakness. What does an EU-less Britain offer? Not very much. With our historical reputation (now a laughing stock) we were able to punch high above our weight at the European table. I am looking at the effect now. If there was another referendum, today, you know, just as I do, it would be overwhelmingly the other way. The lunatics are in the kitchen, the three Brexiteers are failed politicians whose careers were over before this and frankly, I wouldn't trust them to put up a gazebo, let alone forge the difficult and complex deals that are needed to salvage anything from this mess. I repeat my call; All the things I have illustrated in my last few posts are reality. They are now. What is going to change? When is it going to change? How is it going to change? You're bit up your arse, if I may say so. And, I don't drink, so, it's even worse, I don't need a drink to think that. You're depressed, I understand. You display the kind of contempt for people I recognise and have rejected.
|
|
|
Post by Albion on Oct 16, 2016 8:42:44 GMT
So the markets have taken the opportunity to rattle a few economic cages. Brexit hasn't happened yet so you cannot say that your doomsday scenario is even a reality. Everyone knew that there would be some pain en-route to and emanating from Brexit. For most of us it was anticipated and accepted as a price to pay to separate ourselves from the bloated, wasteful and somewhat corrupt bureaucracy that is the EU. It is such a fabulous club that is trying to persuade its second largest net contributor to remain only by threatening us how awful it is going to be if we leave and how much revenge they are going to take when we have done so. That really is some club to belong to when threats are their only course of action. Roger So you can afford this pain? you have reserves to insulate you? What about those on the dole? reliant on food banks? families just about managing? Will they? Just to remind you. The UK is right now, as a result of what Harold Wilson would have called "a run on the pound" 20% worse of in the cost of imports. That means, within a short time (or immediately if Marmite is part of your weekly spend) all those people struggling at the moment will have to economise over a fifth of their income. For how long? 2 years? 4 years? Come on, put your money where your mouth is (excuse the pun); tell me when and, more importantly, how things will recover. give me some counters to the things that are happening. Tell me the good that is emerging. Tell me how all this shit is going to miraculously go away if you lot get your way.* * by no means certain, see the high court for details. Yes, I can afford this pain but that is irrelevant because there is a serious flaw in your argument. If you have researched the referendum results, as I have you, will see that there is a general trend in the results. Poorer areas tended to vote out and affluent areas tended to vote remain. Now if your argument is correct you would expect the poorer areas to be more worried about where their income and food would come from and vote remain while those of a wealthier background wouldn't care less and vote out. You also have no idea how much other countries would like to leave the EU also. During my five months boating in France this year I was never once asked about Brexit. We got into discussion with French and Dutch boating friends and they told us that there are significant numbers of ordinary citizens in their countries that would also like to get out of the EU. And they were adamant that it was not only the right-wingers who would vote to leave such as those that would vote for Marine le Pen and the Front National or Geert Wilders and the Dutch Freedom Party. They bemoaned the fact however that they will never be given the chance to have a vote. The only guy we spoke to who was sorry to see us leave as an old guy in Reims Cathedral who was thankful for what the UK did to help them during WW11 and remembers, as a child, listening to the British bombers flying over his house as part of the liberation effort during that war. Marmitegate was just a blatant attempt by Unilever to profit from the run on the pound. IIRC about 33 items out of 40 that Unilever were going to raise the prices on were actually made in the UK. I accept that some of the items that go into producing things such as Marmite (i.e. the jars) are imported but to try and whack 10% on instantly the pound fell was a somewhat cynical attempt to profit from the events and was quite rightly faced down by Tesco. How were they able to do that? Because the UK is a massive market for goods within the EU and a large customer has some strength in negotiation. For example we are the second largest new car market in the whole of the UK after Germany by some considerable margin over France. Again, the only way that the German car manufacturers have been treated in case they are getting uncomfortable about the risk to their second largest customer is threats from Merkel that they must shut up and not raise the issue of the potential loss of a huge customer. I find it amazing that you expect answers to all your questions when you are not prepared to answer questions posed in return. You have ducked so many questions during your rants so it raises the issue of whether YOU have actually done any research other than quoting newspaper articles verbatim. As for giving a timeline as to when things might improve that is very difficult for an ordinary citizen to as we haven't invoked Article 50 yet, the negotiations haven't started and so the future is difficult to predict with any certainty, as it also is for the Remoaners such as yourself. That doom-laden crystal ball of yours is of no more use than my optimistic one. You can guarantee that it is going to be at least two years from Article 50 though. But answer one question for once please. Tell us if you think that belonging to a club where the only reaction to the potential/actual loss of a valued member is threats of reprisal is any sort of club that you would wish to remain a member of? No efforts to revise the rules to accommodate a member with real concerns just threats and bullying from those whose gilded lifestyle is solely reliant on the EU's funding. Roger
|
|
|
Post by emma on Oct 16, 2016 8:43:05 GMT
You're bit up your arse, if I may say so. And, I don't drink, so, it's even worse, I don't need a drink to think that. You're depressed, I understand. You display the kind of contempt for people I recognise and have rejected. I accept your 'graceful' acknowledgement of defeat and recognise your inability to answer or even address my questions. I hope you are able to cope with the tightening screws of the next few years. x
|
|
|
Post by emma on Oct 16, 2016 8:57:49 GMT
So you can afford this pain? you have reserves to insulate you? What about those on the dole? reliant on food banks? families just about managing? Will they? Just to remind you. The UK is right now, as a result of what Harold Wilson would have called "a run on the pound" 20% worse of in the cost of imports. That means, within a short time (or immediately if Marmite is part of your weekly spend) all those people struggling at the moment will have to economise over a fifth of their income. For how long? 2 years? 4 years? Come on, put your money where your mouth is (excuse the pun); tell me when and, more importantly, how things will recover. give me some counters to the things that are happening. Tell me the good that is emerging. Tell me how all this shit is going to miraculously go away if you lot get your way.* * by no means certain, see the high court for details. Yes, I can afford this pain but that is irrelevant because there is a serious flaw in your argument. If you have researched the referendum results, as I have you, will see that there is a general trend in the results. Poorer areas tended to vote out and affluent areas tended to vote remain. Now if your argument is correct you would expect the poorer areas to be more worried about where their income and food would come from and vote remain while those of a wealthier background wouldn't care less and vote out. But answer one question for once please. Tell us if you think that belonging to a club where the only reaction to the potential/actual loss of a valued member is threats of reprisal is any sort of club that you would wish to remain a member of? No efforts to revise the rules to accommodate a member with real concerns just threats and bullying from those whose gilded lifestyle is solely reliant on the EU's funding. Roger The answer is so simple I am surprised you cannot see it. It has three parts 1. We have just told them to fuck off so they are a little insulted 2. They hold all the cards and have no need to do us any favours, they are 500 million with massive manufacturing bases - as you'll know from travelling the motorways of France or even just sitting at a level crossing - we are 60 million with virtually none. The manufacturing we do have is dependent on European free trade to make it work. We are also massively dependent,yes, dependent on European migrant labour. We simply cannot afford to lose it and the EU negotiators know this well 3. They were prepared to ben over backwards to accommodate Britain (our rebate for instance) but the EU is based on four freedoms and if we are not prepared to obey those 'rules of the club' then we have no place in it. As to your first point, people were lied to, massively, by those who have such great control over their lives, the media. The value of propaganda is huge. The same people who recognise something is terribly wrong with UK society and have been told to blame an outside force. These are methods that have been historically shown to be extremely effective. After all the German people of the 1930s weren't all Nazis. How do you explain areas like Cornwall or the Valleys of South Wales, who receive massive EU funding, voting for the removal of that funding? If the Tories aren't even prepared to support the universal benefit of the health service do you really thing they'll step up for Cornwall or Wales? And yes, those like you, wealthy enough to vote out on a whim or some misplaced nostalgia for a non-existent 50s England, were a large part of the problem. I recognise there is much wrong with the EU. I also recognise that we cannot thrive without it. Instead of Camoron grandstanding and getting nowhere, a bit of sustained pressure to bring more accountability into the process would have done far more good. We will, soon, have no influence whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by Higgs on Oct 16, 2016 9:18:14 GMT
You're bit up your arse, if I may say so. And, I don't drink, so, it's even worse, I don't need a drink to think that. You're depressed, I understand. You display the kind of contempt for people I recognise and have rejected. I accept your 'graceful' acknowledgement of defeat and recognise your inability to answer or even address my questions. I hope you are able to cope with the tightening screws of the next few years. x Don't worry about me. I've been through a tough mill already. I don't know about me answering your questions, mine have been answered and I voted out. You have probably been asking the wrong person your questions. Are you going to be the child sitting in the rear seat of a car going - are we there yet - every five minutes? If Teresa May is shitting herself half as much as some of the remainers are, we're fxxked.
|
|
|
Post by Albion on Oct 16, 2016 9:35:41 GMT
Yes, I can afford this pain but that is irrelevant because there is a serious flaw in your argument. If you have researched the referendum results, as I have you, will see that there is a general trend in the results. Poorer areas tended to vote out and affluent areas tended to vote remain. Now if your argument is correct you would expect the poorer areas to be more worried about where their income and food would come from and vote remain while those of a wealthier background wouldn't care less and vote out. But answer one question for once please. Tell us if you think that belonging to a club where the only reaction to the potential/actual loss of a valued member is threats of reprisal is any sort of club that you would wish to remain a member of? No efforts to revise the rules to accommodate a member with real concerns just threats and bullying from those whose gilded lifestyle is solely reliant on the EU's funding. Roger The answer is so simple I am surprised you cannot see it. It has three parts 1. We have just told them to fuck off so they are a little insulted 2. They hold all the cards and have no need to do us any favours, they are 500 million with massive manufacturing bases - as you'll know from travelling the motorways of France or even just sitting at a level crossing - we are 60 million with virtually none. The manufacturing we do have is dependent on European free trade to make it work. We are also massively dependent,yes, dependent on European migrant labour. We simply cannot afford to lose it and the EU negotiators know this well 3. They were prepared to ben over backwards to accommodate Britain (our rebate for instance) but the EU is based on four freedoms and if we are not prepared to obey those 'rules of the club' then we have no place in it. As to your first point, people were lied to, massively, by those who have such great control over their lives, the media. The value of propaganda is huge. The same people who recognise something is terribly wrong with UK society and have been told to blame an outside force. These are methods that have been historically shown to be extremely effective. After all the German people of the 1930s weren't all Nazis. How do you explain areas like Cornwall or the Valleys of South Wales, who receive massive EU funding, voting for the removal of that funding? If the Tories aren't even prepared to support the universal benefit of the health service do you really thing they'll step up for Cornwall or Wales? And yes, those like you, wealthy enough to vote out on a whim or some misplaced nostalgia for a non-existent 50s England, were a large part of the problem. I recognise there is much wrong with the EU. I also recognise that we cannot thrive without it. Instead of Camoron grandstanding and getting nowhere, a bit of sustained pressure to bring more accountability into the process would have done far more good. We will, soon, have no influence whatsoever.1. But we hadn't told them to fuck off when it was first proposed that there was going to be a referendum. We approached them (well Cameron did in a half-hearted way with no real belief because he and they thought that there was no chance of a Brexit success in the referendum) proposing some reforms and they gave us nothing other than a few crumbs, some of which were time limited and would have expired after 4 years. So, no chance of reforming the EU from within because it suits the EU bureaucrats and the recipient countries to retain the status quo because it works nicely for them. 2. We always hear this 'I recognise that there is much wrong in the EU but we can change it from within' argument from the Remoaners. I have just illustrated above how they were unwilling to contemplate any meaningful change from within and that would have been even more unlikely had we voted to remain when they had us, once more, by the balls. The EU has never shown any propensity to significant reform in its past history and now, with 19 net recipient countries with vetoes there is no chance of net contributor countries getting any meaningful change from within. This has been proven time and time again so just why do you think it would ever have changed? It doesn't suit the bureaucrats and recipient countries to change anything as it is working very nicely for them thank you very much. Kerching!!! Roger
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2016 10:00:59 GMT
Contradictory stupidity? The electorate were asked to make a choice. In or Out. We're not asked to study for a degree in economics or politics before doing it. We say, out - sort it. If you don't sort it, you will go under. Pragmatism. Any idealistic ambitions that I may have had, as possible ways the EU could function, have been totally junked by economic imperatives that govern the EU. It's almost like coming to the conclusion that I don't believe in god. No faith in the EU. We've thrown down the gauntlet, saying - tackle this, because you sure as hell haven't been following a script that makes sense to me. Relate hasn't worked, in an effort to avert the divorce. The councillor tends to be dictatorial and offensive. .... snipped to avoid repeating the waffle We can't change the EU from outside, we could change it from inside. When we entered back in the 70s we voted for a common market not the United States of Europe. Over the years we gradually lost more and more of our control as a result of this stealth change. Many people voted out because they were fed up with the way we had become controlled from outside our country. It's was also becoming an insult for those who fought to keep our independence in the war. In a perfect utopian world, moving all the power and control to the top seems a great idea. Unfortunately whilst so many humans are still selfish and greedy, would you trust this? Humanity would need to reach a stage where money is no longer used to assess our value in this world. Until then I want to keep the power and control local where we can see it and keep reigns on it.
|
|
|
Post by zigspider on Oct 16, 2016 11:46:08 GMT
As for media bias, most of the mainstream media coverage, hello BBC, was blatantly pro remain.
|
|
|
Post by emma on Oct 16, 2016 12:00:29 GMT
1. But we hadn't told them to fuck off when it was first proposed that there was going to be a referendum. We approached them (well Cameron did in a half-hearted way with no real belief because he and they thought that there was no chance of a Brexit success in the referendum) proposing some reforms and they gave us nothing other than a few crumbs, some of which were time limited and would have expired after 4 years. So, no chance of reforming the EU from within because it suits the EU bureaucrats and the recipient countries to retain the status quo because it works nicely for them. 2. We always hear this 'I recognise that there is much wrong in the EU but we can change it from within' argument from the Remoaners. I have just illustrated above how they were unwilling to contemplate any meaningful change from within and that would have been even more unlikely had we voted to remain when they had us, once more, by the balls. The EU has never shown any propensity to significant reform in its past history and now, with 19 net recipient countries with vetoes there is no chance of net contributor countries getting any meaningful change from within. This has been proven time and time again so just why do you think it would ever have changed? It doesn't suit the bureaucrats and recipient countries to change anything as it is working very nicely for them thank you very much. Kerching!!! Roger I can't read red on blue so I have absolutely no idea what you're highlighting. If you were correct on your point 2 then explain why France and Germany, the biggest net contributors are the most vociferous in wanting the EU to continue. ( I do find it amusing that you think Cameron's half-hearted approach is the kind that achieves anything and suddenly he's your knight in shining armour rather than a rather pathetic Bullingdon boy deprived of his mother's love ) And please don't try the Marie le Pen arguments until and unless she becomes president as, like Farage and his lunatics, every time she does get pushed to the surface by her loony right supporters she gets heartily slapped back down again.
|
|
|
Post by Albion on Oct 16, 2016 12:22:44 GMT
1. But we hadn't told them to fuck off when it was first proposed that there was going to be a referendum. We approached them (well Cameron did in a half-hearted way with no real belief because he and they thought that there was no chance of a Brexit success in the referendum) proposing some reforms and they gave us nothing other than a few crumbs, some of which were time limited and would have expired after 4 years. So, no chance of reforming the EU from within because it suits the EU bureaucrats and the recipient countries to retain the status quo because it works nicely for them. 2. We always hear this 'I recognise that there is much wrong in the EU but we can change it from within' argument from the Remoaners. I have just illustrated above how they were unwilling to contemplate any meaningful change from within and that would have been even more unlikely had we voted to remain when they had us, once more, by the balls. The EU has never shown any propensity to significant reform in its past history and now, with 19 net recipient countries with vetoes there is no chance of net contributor countries getting any meaningful change from within. This has been proven time and time again so just why do you think it would ever have changed? It doesn't suit the bureaucrats and recipient countries to change anything as it is working very nicely for them thank you very much. Kerching!!! Roger I can't read red on blue so I have absolutely no idea what you're highlighting.
If you were correct on your point 2 then explain why France and Germany, the biggest net contributors are the most vociferous in wanting the EU to continue. ( I do find it amusing that you think Cameron's half-hearted approach is the kind that achieves anything and suddenly he's your knight in shining armour rather than a rather pathetic Bullingdon boy deprived of his mother's love ) And please don't try the Marie le Pen arguments until and unless she becomes president as, like Farage and his lunatics, every time she does get pushed to the surface by her loony right supporters she gets heartily slapped back down again. How very convenient.Wherever did I say that I supported Cameron's half-hearted approach? The bloke was a joke with his pathetic attempt to convince us that he was negotiating us a good deal. Try to read what I wrote not what you wish to read. France and Germany are vociferous because they wish the present situation to continue. Germany is the EU super-power so feels no need to change anything. France likes to feel that it is a major player in the Eu despite its economy being on the ropes. You have only to travel in France to see the amount of small businesses that have closed to realise that. But, their bureaucrats love the fact they can strut the world stage as an equal of Germany (excuse my laughter) and can continue to boast that they have the European Parliament in Strasbourg once a month (part of France in case you didn't realise) instead of solely in Brussels. That little bit of ego costs the EU about £130 million. Wasteful, the EU, no I must be joking. I don't get your reference to Marine le Pen. I only stated that there was a desire among NON Marine le Pen citizens for a referendum of their own. Try reading what I wrote not what you wish to read. (sounds a bit repetitive I know but sound advice all the same). Roger
|
|
|
Post by emma on Oct 16, 2016 12:28:57 GMT
We were one of the EU 'superpowers' three months ago. Now we are nothing.
I will remind you that we are still part of Europe no matter what our political allegiances. We are either at one with the rest of it or at war with it.
Your turn. Now answer my main question, which you conveniently repeatedly ignore; What are the benefits we can see now to 'our' choice? I have shown many verifiable downsides but no-one is rushing to the plate to show me the upsides.
|
|
|
Post by Albion on Oct 16, 2016 12:29:24 GMT
Yes, I can afford this pain but that is irrelevant because there is a serious flaw in your argument. If you have researched the referendum results, as I have you, will see that there is a general trend in the results. Poorer areas tended to vote out and affluent areas tended to vote remain. Now if your argument is correct you would expect the poorer areas to be more worried about where their income and food would come from and vote remain while those of a wealthier background wouldn't care less and vote out. But answer one question for once please. Tell us if you think that belonging to a club where the only reaction to the potential/actual loss of a valued member is threats of reprisal is any sort of club that you would wish to remain a member of? No efforts to revise the rules to accommodate a member with real concerns just threats and bullying from those whose gilded lifestyle is solely reliant on the EU's funding. Roger As to your first point, people were lied to, massively, by those who have such great control over their lives, the media. The value of propaganda is huge. The same people who recognise something is terribly wrong with UK society and have been told to blame an outside force. These are methods that have been historically shown to be extremely effective. Ah, so the media was responsible for the 17.5 million (52% of voting population) deluded fools who voted for Brexit whereas the 16 million (48%) who voted for remain are enlightened intelligent folk who have throughly researched all aspects of the argument. The remaining 28% of the voting population who didn't bother to vote weren't convinced by any media propaganda. It's a simplistic argument that cannot stand up to scrutiny. Roger
|
|