Brexit - merged threads

[JRDS]

2 hours ago, yod dropper said:

I am absolutely staggered that so many of our MPs are happy to reverse the result of the referendum, let alone water it down.  If this were happening in any number of countries around the world we (and the EU) would be crying foul about autocratic, undemocratic regimes - and we have done in the past.  That there isn't genuine public outrage is unbelievable. 

There is a huge amount of Public outrage just read the comments sections in any newspaper (whilst ignoring thje Soros Trolls who infest them, the Telegraph especially 24/7).

I think people realise mass protests are futile, look at the Hunting Ban march which achieved zilch.  There is more than one way to skin a cat, putting fear into your MP he is about to be out of a job is a good starting point.  Giving them mass defeat at the ballot box at the next opportunity is the next.

 

 

[Aled]

Thankfully this thread is far more polite than others we've had which is good.

 

What I'm going to say next is based on family experience: My Mam's family are Welsh Valleys working class people to the core. They are people i like, we get on well drink beer together , talk fishing sport etc  They all voted leave for one reason and one reason only Immigration. Many of the very well made points to leave or remain in the EU based on trade, or economics, are totally irrelevant to them. They don't care if its soft Brexit, Hard Brexit  or whatever, they just want a handle on immigration. How many others voted leave for the same reason?

 

PS: Forgot to mention they will all be voting Labour at the next Election.

 

Edited July 10, 2018 by Aled

[12gauge82]

35 minutes ago, oowee said:

Surely if we voted leave and we leave then that is the democratic action delivered. We did not vote to end ties and links and trade with the EU. The government that we elected is moving to deliver brexit (as requested) and maintain the best arrangement for that exit. 

It's now clearly obvious May is attempting to leave in name only. We voted to leave the EU, which means anything involved in being a member of that club, I.e free movement of people, the customs union EU legal supremacy and the common market, now if they want to trade with us as a free stand alone country then great, but not at the cost of us being a free sovering state.

[JRDS]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

That's not the point, there was a referendum, in a democracy the majority decision should be respected, if it had gone the other way there wouldn't be a chance you'd see any form of back sliding as is happening now, like I said earlier, the bigger issue here, even bigger than brexit itself is I see democracy and the people being stepped on, regardless if you voted leave or remain. 

All Parliament has done for the last 2 years is bicker whether we should in effect Leave or stay, that was done in the referendum it is absolutely not their choice to make.  All this BS about not knowing what we were voting for, every household in the country got a Project Fear propoganda leaflet laying out exactly what it meant.  May has been taking the **** glad to say I have written to my MP many times since her appointment to say people can see straight through her and her betrayal.  Don't give up people, this is a long way from done yet I think no deal looks more likely every day.

Edited July 10, 2018 by JRDS

[motty]

44 minutes ago, oowee said:

Surely if we voted leave and we leave then that is the democratic action delivered. We did not vote to end ties and links and trade with the EU. The government that we elected is moving to deliver brexit (as requested) and maintain the best arrangement for that exit. 

Incorrect.

[JRDS]

Well last Friday saw the 12 point BS statement trying to detract from just how badly she is screwing the country over, I expect when the white paper is disected there will be more resignations and turmoil.

Edited July 10, 2018 by JRDS

[scutt]

cos I am a THICK leave voter can someone put up a template of a letter I could send off to my MP.(Tory) expressing my view that if it wasn't for politicians infighting and a biased medie I think we could have this eu thingy sorted and as your employer I want you to do as you have been told or I will ?? CRY OR STAMP MY FEET WITHHOLD MY TAXES MAYBE START A NEW PARTY please tell me what would make them sit up and listen.

regards daft voter.

[AVB]

1 hour ago, Aled said:

Thankfully this thread is far more polite than others we've had which is good.

 

What I'm going to say next is based on family experience: My Mam's family are Welsh Valleys working class people to the core. They are people i like, we get on well drink beer together , talk fishing sport etc  They all voted leave for one reason and one reason only Immigration. Many of the very well made points to leave or remain in the EU based on trade, or economics, are totally irrelevant to them. They don't care if its soft Brexit, Hard Brexit  or whatever, they just want a handle on immigration. How many others voted leave for the same reason?

 

PS: Forgot to mention they will all be voting Labour at the next Election.

 

Voting labour because you want to reduce immigration is totally barmy. Labour are all in favour of an open doors policy. Do your family not see that? 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, AVB said:

Voting labour because you want to reduce immigration is totally barmy. Labour are all in favour of an open doors policy. Do your family not see that? 

+1 

[JRDS]

They need to avoid  voting Lib/Lab/Con.  I would be surprised if there wasn't a new credible alternative given the scale of the betrayal put upon anyone who voted Brexit.  The mistake May and her treacherous Remain colleagues & sell out pretend Brexiteers have made is letting their bare faced betrayal Genie out of the bottle too early, this can be stopped with huge public pressure on MP's. 

Edited July 10, 2018 by JRDS

[TriBsa]

29 minutes ago, AVB said:

Voting labour because you want to reduce immigration is totally barmy. Labour are all in favour of an open doors policy. Do your family not see that? 

Voting Conservative because you want to reduce immigration is totally barmy. Tories are all in favour of an open doors policy. What about their "tens of thousands" imigration pledge made at successive elections, when will that kick in?

28 minutes ago, JRDS said:

They need to avoid  voting Lib/Lab/Con.  I would be surprised if there wasn't a new credible alternative given the scale of the betrayal put upon anyone who voted Brexit.  The mistake May and her treacherous Remain colleagues & sell out pretend Brexiteers have made is letting their bare faced betrayal Genie out of the bottle too early, this can be stopped with huge public pressure on MP's. 

If May's deal goes ahead, then we haven't effectively left the EU. UKIP's reason for existence will be as valid as ever perhaps more so, and with Nigel Farage back at the helm will surely be a rallying point for the anger of the betrayed and disenfranchised.

[scutt]

double post

Edited July 10, 2018 by scutt
double post

[Aled]

1 hour ago, AVB said:

Voting labour because you want to reduce immigration is totally barmy. Labour are all in favour of an open doors policy. Do your family not see that? 

Nope!!  They vote Labour because they have always voted labour and their Fathers voted labour etc. ...

Just to let you know I don't vote labour.

Cheers

Aled

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, Aled said:

Nope!!  They vote Labour because they have always voted labour and their Fathers voted labour etc. ...

Just to let you know I don't vote labour.

Cheers

Aled

To be fair, the last few years have been like voting between the frying pan and the fire, neither are interested in serving the people and this whole brexit referendum proves it, the country votes out, yet neither look likely to deliver, if May sells us out, I'd never vote conservative again out of principle, I don't care if the only other option is the monster raving Looney party.

[oowee]

5 hours ago, motty said:

Incorrect.

Illuminating. 

[12gauge82]

I can understand people wanting to remain for their own personal circumstances, for instance, despite my wanting out of the EU, I have taken a hit of somewhere north of 100k on investments due to the unexpected results of brexit and trump, I still wouldn't change my mind as I stand firm in my belief the country and future generations are going to benefit from us leaving overall, and the young trying to make their way need a change if theyre going to have a chance with todays jobs and housing market, I value my country over personal circumstances, I also respect those that don't, and for their own personal circumstances I.e due to their employer or specific EU funding criteria or investments wish to remain, what gets me though, is when these people who have personal invested intrests in remaining, have the cheek to tell the rest of us we're going to damage the country ect when all they care about are their own selfish intrests, they often tend to be the type of people who already have a few million stuffed away already and would happily watch the UK go down the toilet to add to their fortune.

[JohnfromUK]

39 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

what gets me though, is when these people who have personal invested intrests in remaining, have the cheek to tell the rest of us we're going to damage the country ect when all they care about are their own selfish intrests, they often tend to be the type of people who already have a few million stuffed away already and would happily watch the UK go down the toilet to add to their fortune.

Not sure about this; there are members of the 'rich' business community on both sides.  For remain we have Richard Branson, Alan Sugar etc.  For leave, James Dyson, Tim Weatherspoon etc.  There are some successful people on both sides.

The issue for me is not a personal one at all - I in fact voted remain because I understood what it meant better (no strong feelings).  Whilst I understood that leave meant leaving single market and all the restrictions that involves, it wasn't at all clear to me what other trade arrangements would replace it; it still isn't.

But having voted remain, remain lost, and so I am supporting leave now - because that was the majority decision - and I ACCEPT THAT.

What gets me is the people, Gina Miller, George Soros, Tony Blair, Nick Clegg and (especially in the house of Lords) a variety of others most of whom have no official government position and are unelected who waste public time, energy and money trying to hamper, disrupt and ultimately overturn a democratic decision.  They are what would be called in other fields 'bullies'.

[yod dropper]

29 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

ultimately overturn a democratic decision

We have a great deal of soft power around the world, a moral authority.  This is surely being diminished as large numbers of influential people seek to overturn the result of a vote because they didn't agree with the result.  I believe it was in the chaotic pseudo-democratic Venezuela where the President overturned the result of a referendum and you could pick one of several sub-Saharan countries where the President ignores the election results and chooses to cling on to power.  Rightly, we bring some pressure to bear on these countries.  These actions are not that far removed, at the least in attitude to the likes of Blair, Clegg and many more.  This is far more serious than I think has been acknowledged.  It makes us hypocrites.

 

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

I can understand people wanting to remain for their own personal circumstances, for instance, despite my wanting out of the EU, I have taken a hit of somewhere north of 100k on investments due to the unexpected results of brexit and trump, I still wouldn't change my mind as I stand firm in my belief the country and future generations are going to benefit from us leaving overall, and the young trying to make their way need a change if theyre going to have a chance with todays jobs and housing market, I value my country over personal circumstances, I also respect those that don't, and for their own personal circumstances I.e due to their employer or specific EU funding criteria or investments wish to remain, what gets me though, is when these people who have personal invested intrests in remaining, have the cheek to tell the rest of us we're going to damage the country ect when all they care about are their own selfish intrests, they often tend to be the type of people who already have a few million stuffed away already and would happily watch the UK go down the toilet to add to their fortune.

Good post.

 

10 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Not sure about this; there are members of the 'rich' business community on both sides.  For remain we have Richard Branson, Alan Sugar etc.  For leave, James Dyson, Tim Weatherspoon etc.  There are some successful people on both sides.

The issue for me is not a personal one at all - I in fact voted remain because I understood what it meant better (no strong feelings).  Whilst I understood that leave meant leaving single market and all the restrictions that involves, it wasn't at all clear to me what other trade arrangements would replace it; it still isn't.

But having voted remain, remain lost, and so I am supporting leave now - because that was the majority decision - and I ACCEPT THAT.

What gets me is the people, Gina Miller, George Soros, Tony Blair, Nick Clegg and (especially in the house of Lords) a variety of others most of whom have no official government position and are unelected who waste public time, energy and money trying to hamper, disrupt and ultimately overturn a democratic decision.  They are what would be called in other fields 'bullies'.

Another good post.
I wouldnt call them bullies as such, they lack the courage.
Hypocrites and champagne socialists, with a borderline treasonous agenda, blair and miller are definitely in mr soros's pocket, and with no mandate besides their own personal opinion.

What really winds me up is when remainers harp on about how much its going to hurt the country, how unfair its going to be on EU citizens who have made their home here, and how we have ruined our childrens futures blah blah..
When what they are really concerned about is the effect on their own personal wealth and prosperity.
Call it as it is, Ill respect that, but dont start giving it the liberal tears, its utterly fake.

Like when we all got called xenophobes and racists for wanting to leave, wheres all that noise gone? Like they really cared about it at all.
If you want to stand in the way of Brexit, thats your opinion and choice, and its going to be the divisive option.
But dont do it because you claim to love the smell of Brussels, the smell of B.S.
Be honest with yourself, and admit its because you fear losing something more material, and more important than your self respect.

[JohnfromUK]

2 minutes ago, yod dropper said:

I believe it was in the chaotic pseudo-democratic Venezuela

Some of our 'honourable members' have a high admiration for Venezuela - especially on the opposition front bench.

 

3 minutes ago, yod dropper said:

Blair, Clegg

Blair was only ever interested in one thing - and that was called Blair

Clegg, frankly I regard as an 'airhead' - almost everything he suggested was impractical.

[oowee]

23 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Not sure about this; there are members of the 'rich' business community on both sides.  For remain we have Richard Branson, Alan Sugar etc.  For leave, James Dyson, Tim Weatherspoon etc.  There are some successful people on both sides.

The issue for me is not a personal one at all - I in fact voted remain because I understood what it meant better (no strong feelings).  Whilst I understood that leave meant leaving single market and all the restrictions that involves, it wasn't at all clear to me what other trade arrangements would replace it; it still isn't.

But having voted remain, remain lost, and so I am supporting leave now - because that was the majority decision - and I ACCEPT THAT.

What gets me is the people, Gina Miller, George Soros, Tony Blair, Nick Clegg and (especially in the house of Lords) a variety of others most of whom have no official government position and are unelected who waste public time, energy and money trying to hamper, disrupt and ultimately overturn a democratic decision.  They are what would be called in other fields 'bullies'.

Agreed.

Setting aside the common rule book issues. The trade deals will be a lot harder than some make out, take for example the US. The US is saying it would welcome a trade deal with the UK. They will require us to take GM food stuffs, Drug fed beef, Chlorinated chicken and access to the NHS market. Whilst we could agree to all of these things the impact on the UK market would not be great. There are similar issues with many countries many of which have very limited market potential for us. 

 

[Rewulf]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

Agreed.

Setting aside the common rule book issues. The trade deals will be a lot harder than some make out, take for example the US. The US is saying it would welcome a trade deal with the UK. They will require us to take GM food stuffs, Drug fed beef, Chlorinated chicken and access to the NHS market. Whilst we could agree to all of these things the impact on the UK market would not be great. There are similar issues with many countries many of which have very limited market potential for us. 

 

Why would we have to ?
We have our own chicken and beef, which Im sure get their fair share of 'tampering' with.

Having a trade deal with the US ,doesnt mean we have to buy any more from it than what we already do, it just means we CAN if we want to.
Same as OZ, Canada, NZ and south America, like Ive said ,we already buy a huge amount of stuff from the far east, it doesnt seem to be a problem now, why would it be a problem then?
Dont try to insert problems into the mix that dont exist now, and will be less likely to after we properly leave.

[oowee]

5 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Why would we have to ?
We have our own chicken and beef, which Im sure get their fair share of 'tampering' with.

Having a trade deal with the US ,doesnt mean we have to buy any more from it than what we already do, it just means we CAN if we want to.
Same as OZ, Canada, NZ and south America, like Ive said ,we already buy a huge amount of stuff from the far east, it doesnt seem to be a problem now, why would it be a problem then?
Dont try to insert problems into the mix that dont exist now, and will be less likely to after we properly leave.

These are issues that need to be thought through.

It would be an issue for the US because these foods are currently blocked. We let them in and the price difference would sway the market and displace UK production or we adopt the same standards. Without these markets The US won't want a deal. Do we want privatised health care? I dont think many would welcome a change with the US and these were some of the issues under debate with TTIP and why the negotiations took so long.

NZ.  We are the biggest buyer of NZ lamb in the EU but there are market limits in place to protect our lamb markets. What can we sell to them?

Aus buys ??

[Rewulf]

3 minutes ago, oowee said:

These are issues that need to be thought through.

It would be an issue for the US because these foods are currently blocked. We let them in and the price difference would sway the market and displace UK production or we adopt the same standards. Without these markets The US won't want a deal. Do we want privatised health care? I dont think many would welcome a change with the US and these were some of the issues under debate with TTIP and why the negotiations took so long.

NZ.  We are the biggest buyer of NZ lamb in the EU but there are market limits in place to protect our lamb markets. What can we sell to them?

Aus buys ??

Thats not addressing the question, you say the US wont want a deal unless we DEFINITELY buy food from them, how on earth can we even know if people even want American foodstuffs ?
Are you saying the only way we can have deals is by agreeing to buy things from countries when we dont know if theres a market for them here, and vice versa?
We already have privatised health care in the UK ,BUPA ect, a simple deal to extend US health insurance to BUPA clinics, and by extension NHS hospitals, is hardly a massive issue.
Trade agreements are not always about mutual reciprocation of goods, its more about the POSSIBILITY of emerging markets in the future, and having the ability to have unfettered access to them.

OZ buys warships , and other military tech, billions of £ worth btw.

[oowee]

38 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Thats not addressing the question, you say the US wont want a deal unless we DEFINITELY buy food from them, how on earth can we even know if people even want American foodstuffs ?
Are you saying the only way we can have deals is by agreeing to buy things from countries when we dont know if theres a market for them here, and vice versa?
We already have privatised health care in the UK ,BUPA ect, a simple deal to extend US health insurance to BUPA clinics, and by extension NHS hospitals, is hardly a massive issue.
Trade agreements are not always about mutual reciprocation of goods, its more about the POSSIBILITY of emerging markets in the future, and having the ability to have unfettered access to them.

OZ buys warships , and other military tech, billions of £ worth btw.

Yes.

The US previously asked for access to the NHS as part of free trade to deliver NHS services.

Trade agreements are always about mutual reciprocation. I will sell you this in exchange for you selling me that. 

Emerging markets are mostly (except finance) about low cost production. We mostly want WTO terms in place to protect our markets as best we can. We don't want unfettered access to many of these markets if it means (which it will) unfettered access to our own.  

Canada buys submarines from us together with the refit's and on going maintenance but these things are also controlled. 

Edited July 11, 2018 by oowee