Seth you keep repeating the same, 'let them get on with it' mantra. But frankly, as funny as that would be, this about our future. I don't want our future prospects to be made significantly worse because we allowed them to plough on with Brexit madness. I want to find a way of stopping this shit show. The first duty of any government is to protect its citizens, all the time the government pursues this nonsense we have a government that is failing in its key objective. Someone needs to find a way of hitting the 'stop' button before it's too late.
You are right, and I want it to all go away too. However just as I challenge leavers (boringly and repeatedly admittedly) to supply some detail, us remainers would need to also supply a detailed road map to remain. Squatting and defecating over all of us is the immense arse of the referendum vote and result. How on earth does that get undone? A second referendum would then lead to calls of best of three, none of the political parties are brave enough to acknowledge the awfulness of it all and stand on a platform of remain. The idiot entrenched leavers won't admit they were wrong anyway so what can be done? How can the stop button be hit? My clumsy method is to encourage greater and greater realisation of their folly by calling the leavers out to provide answers in a flimsy hope that enough of them will accept they were wrong and petition or demand or demonstrate in some way that the referendum result can be reversed. Failing that maybe the EU can stop air travel, and lorry drivers and the like, forced repatriation and so on, straight away, and show the leavers what they voted for in stark reality. OR. Maybe the leavers can tell us the solutions and what's good about brexit and win the remainers over...but why should they when they've already won?
Red_in_SE8 said: » show previous quotes For the most part this thread is a very informative and serious debate/commentary (more commentary these days since the few Intelligent Brexit voters we had have given up in the face of the overwhelming evidence, that has emerged since the Referendum, of what a disaster Brexit is for the U.K.) about the most serious crisis facing the U.K. since WW2. Brexit is far from a joke.
The 'most serious crisis facing the UK since WW2' would happen if an elitist cabal overturns the result of the Referendum against the wishes of the majority.
37% is not a majority.
Consoling yourself by fiddling numbers would not change the severe nature of the political crisis it would cause.
Not if we had a further (binding) referendum. Especially as the electorate are now much better informed about the consequences of leaving.
Surely nothing to be afraid in that for the leavers?
We had a referendum. We were all warned the world would end if we left. We are only 'better informed' now in that we know that was bs.
Last 2 points are clearly only your opinion/views. Recent Polls suggest now that the electorate feel better informed they would not vote 'leave'. Hence the reluctance for a further vote?
I don't see why people feel better informed. Certainly the issues have been discussed to a great extent, which was scandalously lacking from both sides during the lead up to the referendum.
We cannot be well informed about what Brexit will eventually mean in reality as a deal hasnt been struck and far too many politicians are doing their best to make sure it doesn't happen. Including the Prime Minister with poor negotiations.
You don't feel better informed now? Well you were better informed than I was in June 2016 then. Presumably if I had asked you, you would have been able to explain me exactly what Euratom is, and why it is so important to health care. You would have instantly pointed out that the European Court of Human Rights is not an EU institution. You'd have explained to me what passporting is, as it affects City financial institutions, and what could happen if they lose it. You knew all about the VAT catch for importers that was revealed to the rest of us earlier this week. Of course you knew that the regions most pro-Brexit are precisely those most set to suffer the economic consequences, while London would suffer the least. You knew that the Medicines Agency would likely relocate to Amsterdam, costing us £500m in the process. You knew that the Civil Service would find itself managing more than 300 separate projects at this time in order to make Brexit happen. To name but a few of the things I didn't know, but you clearly did.
Wow, I wish you'd told me those things. And then, best of all, your reasons why, despite all that, you still planned to Vote Leave!
Prague you are ignoring the increased employment opportunities of having to employ 5000 more HMRC staff, extra food and products standards experts and the benefits of the investment to quadruple the size of the Dover bound M20 to accomodate queuing lorries.
Interesting article and a rare factual one rather than hysterical on Brexit from this publication.
Many brexitiers have been concerned about these type of manoeuvrings since the referendum. Once again, we have our politicians giving the majority voters a big 'up yours'.
I wonder how some will react to this if it comes to pass? This could lead to a significant percentage of the 17.4m looking for more extreme political representation in frustration, which would be bad for everybody.
The related article by Andrew Rawnsley calmly answers your point. He maps out the various reasons "How and why Britain might be asked to vote once more on Brexit". In aprticular it is worth considering this passage:
There are some identifiable trends in public opinion. Since Mrs May triggered article 50, there has been a downward movement in the proportion of voters who think the government is making a good fist of the Brexit negotiations. This is not surprising when so many of the Leavers’ promises, including the fantasy about it being child’s play to negotiate and the fib that there would be a massive windfall for the NHS, have been proved false. Levels of public anxiety about where Britain will be left by withdrawal have been rising. The numbers thinking we will be worse off out of the EU have gone up a bit and the numbers thinking we will be better off are down a bit. There are now fewer voters who think Brexit will increase Britain’s influence in the world and more voters who think it will diminish our global clout. There has also been a gentle rise in the proportion of voters who say they favour another referendum, though they are still outnumbered by those who don’t want one.
On the Leave/Remain question itself, opinion is still finely balanced. The polling company YouGov runs a useful tracker on this question. The most recent result has 46% thinking Brexit was the wrong choice, against 42% who say it was the right one. That suggests there is some buyer’s remorse, but not yet enough of it to induce a shift in the positions of the decisive political players. Public opinion will have to shift more dramatically before any of the politicians in a position of influence will be willing to act.
This does not surprise me at all. Not all those who voted leave are as ardent and stubborn as those on here who appear most regularly. Furthermore, as I argued at the time, the real problems of leaving, both in terms of the sheer scale of what we are giving up, and the economic consequences of doing so, would only slowly become apparent to the disengaged majority.
I don't think that YouGov poll will get to 60:40 by October, but I believe will show steady progress as people become clearer about just what it means. If it breaches say 56:44 what will be your argument about "the will of the people" then? Will you continue just to mutter darkly about the possibility that some extremists will resort to violence? I hope not. We already have one dead MP.
Hmmm, I didn't say there would be violence you did. I also said that driving people to extremes is bad. This isn't something I would want as I thought that i had made clear.
Ukip got around 4m votes before the referendum, afterwards they have returned to being an irrelevance. This is partly because they are nutters, partly because they have attracted some extreme right wingers and partly because voters thought that the decision had been made. Ukip appears to have gone further to the right in the last 18 months.
To whom might disaffected brexitiers turn if we are denied what we were promised? There is no party apart from ukip. None of the regular parties are offering an option to get out of the EU if May screws us over as some thinks she might.
Interesting article and a rare factual one rather than hysterical on Brexit from this publication.
Many brexitiers have been concerned about these type of manoeuvrings since the referendum. Once again, we have our politicians giving the majority voters a big 'up yours'.
I wonder how some will react to this if it comes to pass? This could lead to a significant percentage of the 17.4m looking for more extreme political representation in frustration, which would be bad for everybody.
The related article by Andrew Rawnsley calmly answers your point. He maps out the various reasons "How and why Britain might be asked to vote once more on Brexit". In aprticular it is worth considering this passage:
There are some identifiable trends in public opinion. Since Mrs May triggered article 50, there has been a downward movement in the proportion of voters who think the government is making a good fist of the Brexit negotiations. This is not surprising when so many of the Leavers’ promises, including the fantasy about it being child’s play to negotiate and the fib that there would be a massive windfall for the NHS, have been proved false. Levels of public anxiety about where Britain will be left by withdrawal have been rising. The numbers thinking we will be worse off out of the EU have gone up a bit and the numbers thinking we will be better off are down a bit. There are now fewer voters who think Brexit will increase Britain’s influence in the world and more voters who think it will diminish our global clout. There has also been a gentle rise in the proportion of voters who say they favour another referendum, though they are still outnumbered by those who don’t want one.
On the Leave/Remain question itself, opinion is still finely balanced. The polling company YouGov runs a useful tracker on this question. The most recent result has 46% thinking Brexit was the wrong choice, against 42% who say it was the right one. That suggests there is some buyer’s remorse, but not yet enough of it to induce a shift in the positions of the decisive political players. Public opinion will have to shift more dramatically before any of the politicians in a position of influence will be willing to act.
This does not surprise me at all. Not all those who voted leave are as ardent and stubborn as those on here who appear most regularly. Furthermore, as I argued at the time, the real problems of leaving, both in terms of the sheer scale of what we are giving up, and the economic consequences of doing so, would only slowly become apparent to the disengaged majority.
I don't think that YouGov poll will get to 60:40 by October, but I believe will show steady progress as people become clearer about just what it means. If it breaches say 56:44 what will be your argument about "the will of the people" then? Will you continue just to mutter darkly about the possibility that some extremists will resort to violence? I hope not. We already have one dead MP.
Hmmm, I didn't say there would be violence you did. I also said that driving people to extremes is bad. This isn't something I would want as I thought that i had made clear.
Ukip got around 4m votes before the referendum, afterwards they have returned to being an irrelevance. This is partly because they are nutters, partly because they have attracted some extreme right wingers and partly because voters thought that the decision had been made. Ukip appears to have gone further to the right in the last 18 months.
To whom might disaffected brexitiers turn if we are denied what we were promised? There is no party apart from ukip. None of the regular parties are offering an option to get out of the EU if May screws us over as some thinks she might.
I have for ages been banging on about how HMRC needs to be made fit for purpose and that govt. should target corporate tax dodgers. Unforunately no party has placed that in its manifesto. I do not plan to resort to violence as a result.There are loads of other things I just had to put up with over the years too, especially under Thatcher. If, somehow, we do not in the end leave the EU, it will only be because a clear majority of UK citizens will have indicated that that is their wish. How could it be otherwise? It is called something beginning with D...
Interesting article and a rare factual one rather than hysterical on Brexit from this publication.
Many brexitiers have been concerned about these type of manoeuvrings since the referendum. Once again, we have our politicians giving the majority voters a big 'up yours'.
I wonder how some will react to this if it comes to pass? This could lead to a significant percentage of the 17.4m looking for more extreme political representation in frustration, which would be bad for everybody.
The related article by Andrew Rawnsley calmly answers your point. He maps out the various reasons "How and why Britain might be asked to vote once more on Brexit". In aprticular it is worth considering this passage:
There are some identifiable trends in public opinion. Since Mrs May triggered article 50, there has been a downward movement in the proportion of voters who think the government is making a good fist of the Brexit negotiations. This is not surprising when so many of the Leavers’ promises, including the fantasy about it being child’s play to negotiate and the fib that there would be a massive windfall for the NHS, have been proved false. Levels of public anxiety about where Britain will be left by withdrawal have been rising. The numbers thinking we will be worse off out of the EU have gone up a bit and the numbers thinking we will be better off are down a bit. There are now fewer voters who think Brexit will increase Britain’s influence in the world and more voters who think it will diminish our global clout. There has also been a gentle rise in the proportion of voters who say they favour another referendum, though they are still outnumbered by those who don’t want one.
On the Leave/Remain question itself, opinion is still finely balanced. The polling company YouGov runs a useful tracker on this question. The most recent result has 46% thinking Brexit was the wrong choice, against 42% who say it was the right one. That suggests there is some buyer’s remorse, but not yet enough of it to induce a shift in the positions of the decisive political players. Public opinion will have to shift more dramatically before any of the politicians in a position of influence will be willing to act.
This does not surprise me at all. Not all those who voted leave are as ardent and stubborn as those on here who appear most regularly. Furthermore, as I argued at the time, the real problems of leaving, both in terms of the sheer scale of what we are giving up, and the economic consequences of doing so, would only slowly become apparent to the disengaged majority.
I don't think that YouGov poll will get to 60:40 by October, but I believe will show steady progress as people become clearer about just what it means. If it breaches say 56:44 what will be your argument about "the will of the people" then? Will you continue just to mutter darkly about the possibility that some extremists will resort to violence? I hope not. We already have one dead MP.
Hmmm, I didn't say there would be violence you did. I also said that driving people to extremes is bad. This isn't something I would want as I thought that i had made clear.
Ukip got around 4m votes before the referendum, afterwards they have returned to being an irrelevance. This is partly because they are nutters, partly because they have attracted some extreme right wingers and partly because voters thought that the decision had been made. Ukip appears to have gone further to the right in the last 18 months.
To whom might disaffected brexitiers turn if we are denied what we were promised? There is no party apart from ukip. None of the regular parties are offering an option to get out of the EU if May screws us over as some thinks she might.
I have for ages been banging on about how HMRC needs to be made fit for purpose and that govt. should target corporate tax dodgers. Unforunately no party has placed that in its manifesto. I do not plan to resort to violence as a result.There are loads of other things I just had to put up with over the years too, especially under Thatcher. If, somehow, we do not in the end leave the EU, it will only be because a clear majority of UK citizens will have indicated that that is their wish. How could it be otherwise? It is called something beginning with D...
Obviously I don't agree with you. Your analogy is poor and a so called soft Brexit isn't Brexit at all yet will be claimed to be by the remainers that manoeuvre to make it happen.
Interesting article and a rare factual one rather than hysterical on Brexit from this publication.
Many brexitiers have been concerned about these type of manoeuvrings since the referendum. Once again, we have our politicians giving the majority voters a big 'up yours'.
I wonder how some will react to this if it comes to pass? This could lead to a significant percentage of the 17.4m looking for more extreme political representation in frustration, which would be bad for everybody.
The related article by Andrew Rawnsley calmly answers your point. He maps out the various reasons "How and why Britain might be asked to vote once more on Brexit". In aprticular it is worth considering this passage:
There are some identifiable trends in public opinion. Since Mrs May triggered article 50, there has been a downward movement in the proportion of voters who think the government is making a good fist of the Brexit negotiations. This is not surprising when so many of the Leavers’ promises, including the fantasy about it being child’s play to negotiate and the fib that there would be a massive windfall for the NHS, have been proved false. Levels of public anxiety about where Britain will be left by withdrawal have been rising. The numbers thinking we will be worse off out of the EU have gone up a bit and the numbers thinking we will be better off are down a bit. There are now fewer voters who think Brexit will increase Britain’s influence in the world and more voters who think it will diminish our global clout. There has also been a gentle rise in the proportion of voters who say they favour another referendum, though they are still outnumbered by those who don’t want one.
On the Leave/Remain question itself, opinion is still finely balanced. The polling company YouGov runs a useful tracker on this question. The most recent result has 46% thinking Brexit was the wrong choice, against 42% who say it was the right one. That suggests there is some buyer’s remorse, but not yet enough of it to induce a shift in the positions of the decisive political players. Public opinion will have to shift more dramatically before any of the politicians in a position of influence will be willing to act.
This does not surprise me at all. Not all those who voted leave are as ardent and stubborn as those on here who appear most regularly. Furthermore, as I argued at the time, the real problems of leaving, both in terms of the sheer scale of what we are giving up, and the economic consequences of doing so, would only slowly become apparent to the disengaged majority.
I don't think that YouGov poll will get to 60:40 by October, but I believe will show steady progress as people become clearer about just what it means. If it breaches say 56:44 what will be your argument about "the will of the people" then? Will you continue just to mutter darkly about the possibility that some extremists will resort to violence? I hope not. We already have one dead MP.
Hmmm, I didn't say there would be violence you did. I also said that driving people to extremes is bad. This isn't something I would want as I thought that i had made clear.
Ukip got around 4m votes before the referendum, afterwards they have returned to being an irrelevance. This is partly because they are nutters, partly because they have attracted some extreme right wingers and partly because voters thought that the decision had been made. Ukip appears to have gone further to the right in the last 18 months.
To whom might disaffected brexitiers turn if we are denied what we were promised? There is no party apart from ukip. None of the regular parties are offering an option to get out of the EU if May screws us over as some thinks she might.
I have for ages been banging on about how HMRC needs to be made fit for purpose and that govt. should target corporate tax dodgers. Unforunately no party has placed that in its manifesto. I do not plan to resort to violence as a result.There are loads of other things I just had to put up with over the years too, especially under Thatcher. If, somehow, we do not in the end leave the EU, it will only be because a clear majority of UK citizens will have indicated that that is their wish. How could it be otherwise? It is called something beginning with D...
Obviously I don't agree with you. Your analogy is poor and a so called soft Brexit isn't Brexit at all yet will be claimed to be by the remainers that manoeuvre to make it happen.
If the EU comprises 27 members, of which the UK is not one, that will mean "brexit", won't it?
Interesting article and a rare factual one rather than hysterical on Brexit from this publication.
Many brexitiers have been concerned about these type of manoeuvrings since the referendum. Once again, we have our politicians giving the majority voters a big 'up yours'.
I wonder how some will react to this if it comes to pass? This could lead to a significant percentage of the 17.4m looking for more extreme political representation in frustration, which would be bad for everybody.
The related article by Andrew Rawnsley calmly answers your point. He maps out the various reasons "How and why Britain might be asked to vote once more on Brexit". In aprticular it is worth considering this passage:
There are some identifiable trends in public opinion. Since Mrs May triggered article 50, there has been a downward movement in the proportion of voters who think the government is making a good fist of the Brexit negotiations. This is not surprising when so many of the Leavers’ promises, including the fantasy about it being child’s play to negotiate and the fib that there would be a massive windfall for the NHS, have been proved false. Levels of public anxiety about where Britain will be left by withdrawal have been rising. The numbers thinking we will be worse off out of the EU have gone up a bit and the numbers thinking we will be better off are down a bit. There are now fewer voters who think Brexit will increase Britain’s influence in the world and more voters who think it will diminish our global clout. There has also been a gentle rise in the proportion of voters who say they favour another referendum, though they are still outnumbered by those who don’t want one.
On the Leave/Remain question itself, opinion is still finely balanced. The polling company YouGov runs a useful tracker on this question. The most recent result has 46% thinking Brexit was the wrong choice, against 42% who say it was the right one. That suggests there is some buyer’s remorse, but not yet enough of it to induce a shift in the positions of the decisive political players. Public opinion will have to shift more dramatically before any of the politicians in a position of influence will be willing to act.
This does not surprise me at all. Not all those who voted leave are as ardent and stubborn as those on here who appear most regularly. Furthermore, as I argued at the time, the real problems of leaving, both in terms of the sheer scale of what we are giving up, and the economic consequences of doing so, would only slowly become apparent to the disengaged majority.
I don't think that YouGov poll will get to 60:40 by October, but I believe will show steady progress as people become clearer about just what it means. If it breaches say 56:44 what will be your argument about "the will of the people" then? Will you continue just to mutter darkly about the possibility that some extremists will resort to violence? I hope not. We already have one dead MP.
Hmmm, I didn't say there would be violence you did. I also said that driving people to extremes is bad. This isn't something I would want as I thought that i had made clear.
Ukip got around 4m votes before the referendum, afterwards they have returned to being an irrelevance. This is partly because they are nutters, partly because they have attracted some extreme right wingers and partly because voters thought that the decision had been made. Ukip appears to have gone further to the right in the last 18 months.
To whom might disaffected brexitiers turn if we are denied what we were promised? There is no party apart from ukip. None of the regular parties are offering an option to get out of the EU if May screws us over as some thinks she might.
I have for ages been banging on about how HMRC needs to be made fit for purpose and that govt. should target corporate tax dodgers. Unforunately no party has placed that in its manifesto. I do not plan to resort to violence as a result.There are loads of other things I just had to put up with over the years too, especially under Thatcher. If, somehow, we do not in the end leave the EU, it will only be because a clear majority of UK citizens will have indicated that that is their wish. How could it be otherwise? It is called something beginning with D...
Obviously I don't agree with you. Your analogy is poor and a so called soft Brexit isn't Brexit at all yet will be claimed to be by the remainers that manoeuvre to make it happen.
While we're on the subject then. What is the difference between a soft and a hard brexit? What does brexit mean to you in practical terms? Or even in philosophical terms? What will be the benefit of brexit in your eyes?
A soft Brexit seems to be one where we stay in the CU/SM. Which is exactly what UKIP, Vote Leave and all the Tory Brexiters campaigned for. If anything, since then we have seen a rise in the far right manoeuvring for a hard Brexit despite not having a mandate for it, backed by their allies in the fourth estate. And these are the same people hysterically moaning with fact-free rants about Remainers trying to sabotage Brexit.
A soft Brexit seems to be one where we stay in the CU/SM. Which is exactly what UKIP, Vote Leave and all the Tory Brexiters campaigned for. If anything, since then we have seen a rise in the far right manoeuvring for a hard Brexit despite not having a mandate for it, backed by their allies in the fourth estate. And these are the same people hysterically moaning with fact-free rants about Remainers trying to sabotage Brexit.
I admire your ability to make a distinction. To me any brexit is a hard brexit and any border is a hard border. The rest simply seems to me toying round the edges.
Interesting article and a rare factual one rather than hysterical on Brexit from this publication.
Many brexitiers have been concerned about these type of manoeuvrings since the referendum. Once again, we have our politicians giving the majority voters a big 'up yours'.
I wonder how some will react to this if it comes to pass? This could lead to a significant percentage of the 17.4m looking for more extreme political representation in frustration, which would be bad for everybody.
The related article by Andrew Rawnsley calmly answers your point. He maps out the various reasons "How and why Britain might be asked to vote once more on Brexit". In aprticular it is worth considering this passage:
There are some identifiable trends in public opinion. Since Mrs May triggered article 50, there has been a downward movement in the proportion of voters who think the government is making a good fist of the Brexit negotiations. This is not surprising when so many of the Leavers’ promises, including the fantasy about it being child’s play to negotiate and the fib that there would be a massive windfall for the NHS, have been proved false. Levels of public anxiety about where Britain will be left by withdrawal have been rising. The numbers thinking we will be worse off out of the EU have gone up a bit and the numbers thinking we will be better off are down a bit. There are now fewer voters who think Brexit will increase Britain’s influence in the world and more voters who think it will diminish our global clout. There has also been a gentle rise in the proportion of voters who say they favour another referendum, though they are still outnumbered by those who don’t want one.
On the Leave/Remain question itself, opinion is still finely balanced. The polling company YouGov runs a useful tracker on this question. The most recent result has 46% thinking Brexit was the wrong choice, against 42% who say it was the right one. That suggests there is some buyer’s remorse, but not yet enough of it to induce a shift in the positions of the decisive political players. Public opinion will have to shift more dramatically before any of the politicians in a position of influence will be willing to act.
This does not surprise me at all. Not all those who voted leave are as ardent and stubborn as those on here who appear most regularly. Furthermore, as I argued at the time, the real problems of leaving, both in terms of the sheer scale of what we are giving up, and the economic consequences of doing so, would only slowly become apparent to the disengaged majority.
I don't think that YouGov poll will get to 60:40 by October, but I believe will show steady progress as people become clearer about just what it means. If it breaches say 56:44 what will be your argument about "the will of the people" then? Will you continue just to mutter darkly about the possibility that some extremists will resort to violence? I hope not. We already have one dead MP.
Hmmm, I didn't say there would be violence you did. I also said that driving people to extremes is bad. This isn't something I would want as I thought that i had made clear.
Ukip got around 4m votes before the referendum, afterwards they have returned to being an irrelevance. This is partly because they are nutters, partly because they have attracted some extreme right wingers and partly because voters thought that the decision had been made. Ukip appears to have gone further to the right in the last 18 months.
To whom might disaffected brexitiers turn if we are denied what we were promised? There is no party apart from ukip. None of the regular parties are offering an option to get out of the EU if May screws us over as some thinks she might.
The whole country has been screwed over by the Brexit elite (read Clegg's book) and the mugs who fell for their lies and nonsense. Unlike a lot of Guardian pundits and other liberal voices I could not give a fuck about Brexit voters, about how they feel or what they want. Only one thing matters and that is stopping Brexit.
What we were told Brexit would look like all the way up to polling day by those who claimed to be the top Brexiters was:
- staying in the CU/SM - no hard border - free movement with the EU - but we can make sure Brits get priority for jobs and being treated on the NHS - £350m a week to be spent on the NHS - blue passports - keeping all of the benefits of EU membership - but we don't have to adhere to ECJ rulings - we can fish our own fish to local extinction - we wouldn't have MEPs anymore - but our influence as a global superpower would more than make up for that and the EU would be begging to do what we wanted - and all the other non-EU countries would be lining up around the block to get us into the EU - also making sure none of the Muslims from Turkey, Libya and Syria get into the UK
I wondered if CL might have moved on to sensible debate. Oh well.
Chrissake man, stop whining and debate, then. What on earth is not "sensible" about these questions @seth plum asked you?
While we're on the subject then. What is the difference between a soft and a hard brexit? What does brexit mean to you in practical terms? Or even in philosophical terms? What will be the benefit of brexit in your eyes?
Go on, answer it. Why do you not do so? And to his last question, I am especially interested in whether you can answer it in the context of your own daily life as a normal and, I perceive, fairly typical British citizen.
I wondered if CL might have moved on to sensible debate. Oh well.
Chrissake man, stop whining and debate, then. What on earth is not "sensible" about these questions @seth plum asked you?
While we're on the subject then. What is the difference between a soft and a hard brexit? What does brexit mean to you in practical terms? Or even in philosophical terms? What will be the benefit of brexit in your eyes?
Go on, answer it. Why do you not do so? And to his last question, I am especially interested in whether you can answer it in the context of your own daily life as a normal and, I perceive, fairly typical British citizen.
ME stop whining? I think most of us can have that accusation put in our direction.
Brexit, amongst other things is being able to decide on who fishes in our waters, not being in the Euro (it's coming), not having to undertake 40 hours of classes to drive a lorry, being free of ever closer political union and more recently being able to control our immigration if we choose to.
I would accept a trading group and certain restrictions this would bring if it was fair and equitable.
The EU influences just about every part of our daily lives. Many are good, some are bad. To continue to trade with the EU block our traders who export to them will still necessarily have to conform to their regulations.
until a deal is struck, we won't know how much will change.
I wondered if CL might have moved on to sensible debate. Oh well.
Chrissake man, stop whining and debate, then. What on earth is not "sensible" about these questions @seth plum asked you?
While we're on the subject then. What is the difference between a soft and a hard brexit? What does brexit mean to you in practical terms? Or even in philosophical terms? What will be the benefit of brexit in your eyes?
Go on, answer it. Why do you not do so? And to his last question, I am especially interested in whether you can answer it in the context of your own daily life as a normal and, I perceive, fairly typical British citizen.
ME stop whining? I think most of us can have that accusation put in our direction.
Brexit, amongst other things is being able to decide on who fishes in our waters, not being in the Euro (it's coming), not having to undertake 40 hours of classes to drive a lorry, being free of ever closer political union and more recently being able to control our immigration if we choose to.
I would accept a trading group and certain restrictions this would bring if it was fair and equitable.
The EU influences just about every part of our daily lives. Many are good, some are bad. To continue to trade with the EU block our traders who export to them will still necessarily have to conform to their regulations.
until a deal is struck, we won't know how much will change.
OK. Fair enough. You have set out your own issues clearly enough. Are you a lorry driver, BTW? I just wondered how many hours of classes you'd consider acceptable.
Beyond that, a number of people on here have pretty coherent arguments as to why they would not agree with you. Whether a majority of citizens are now moving towards their rather than your POV is an open question, but I fail to see the grounds on which you brand them "not sensible". Maybe you feel alone because the counterpoint posts are usually not arguments but just trolling.
What I find slightly sinister is this suggestion that you place that if Brexit is not executed according to how you define it, there will be public unrest. This public suggestion is becoming more common. "If you don't give us the hard Brexit we voted for, there will be trouble on the streets". We have already seen where that ends, haven't we?
The problem I have with it is this. What are the political issues which have previously caused violent unrest in the UK? It has been a while, but they are: The Poll Tax, the miners strike, and Wapping. Plus localised issues between communities and the police. In all those cases I could empathise with the very personal issues which affected many of those protesting violently. But Brexit? I mean come on, are you telling me that you feel like smashing up your local town hall because lorry drivers have to do 40 hours of classes?
I very much doubt anti-EU sentiment would be anywhere near as high if we hadn't had 25 years of an intensely hateful, erroneous tabloid led campaign that originally just used to slap anti-EU headlines up when there was a slow news day but it quickly became their main selling point. And as Prague alludes to, people ignore the incompetence and malice of our own politicians on issues that actually affect most Britons because they are busy being angry about something like bendy bananas or something equally asinine that first appears on the front page of a rag.
If people were even a tenth as angry at benefit cuts, NHS and police cuts and corruption in Westminster as they are at how many hours lorry drivers must take in classes then maybe life might be just that little bit better. People have been hypnotized into reeling off anti-EU talking points and factoids that they see on the front page of a newspaper but do any of them know how much their NHS Trust has been told to find in savings, or how many police have been taken off the front lines, or how many people have been made homeless in their area due to spending cuts?
I wondered if CL might have moved on to sensible debate. Oh well.
Chrissake man, stop whining and debate, then. What on earth is not "sensible" about these questions @seth plum asked you?
While we're on the subject then. What is the difference between a soft and a hard brexit? What does brexit mean to you in practical terms? Or even in philosophical terms? What will be the benefit of brexit in your eyes?
Go on, answer it. Why do you not do so? And to his last question, I am especially interested in whether you can answer it in the context of your own daily life as a normal and, I perceive, fairly typical British citizen.
ME stop whining? I think most of us can have that accusation put in our direction.
Brexit, amongst other things is being able to decide on who fishes in our waters, not being in the Euro (it's coming), not having to undertake 40 hours of classes to drive a lorry, being free of ever closer political union and more recently being able to control our immigration if we choose to.
I would accept a trading group and certain restrictions this would bring if it was fair and equitable.
The EU influences just about every part of our daily lives. Many are good, some are bad. To continue to trade with the EU block our traders who export to them will still necessarily have to conform to their regulations.
until a deal is struck, we won't know how much will change.
Would it be worth pointing out that, without the 40 hours of classes (CTC?), there'll be little likelihood of driving the lorry outside the UK?
There was mention of reciprocity between the UK and EU, should there be a leaving deal and then, hopefully, a trade agreement (but this would require some form of equivalence between the two in terms of standards). I very much doubt that UK professional drivers will have their competence accepted without an equivalent training regime.
The EU is preparing for no deal, because it is one likely outcome, as the UK has flagged. No deal may be acceptable to some, but I am less sanguine.
If I worked in haulage (between the UK and Ireland) I would be looking out for any mention of a container handling facility being introduced to an Irish port - as that, to me, would be signifying that no agreement was possible - with Irish trade to the EU and beyond bypassing the current trade route through the UK.
Comments
Squatting and defecating over all of us is the immense arse of the referendum vote and result. How on earth does that get undone?
A second referendum would then lead to calls of best of three, none of the political parties are brave enough to acknowledge the awfulness of it all and stand on a platform of remain. The idiot entrenched leavers won't admit they were wrong anyway so what can be done? How can the stop button be hit?
My clumsy method is to encourage greater and greater realisation of their folly by calling the leavers out to provide answers in a flimsy hope that enough of them will accept they were wrong and petition or demand or demonstrate in some way that the referendum result can be reversed.
Failing that maybe the EU can stop air travel, and lorry drivers and the like, forced repatriation and so on, straight away, and show the leavers what they voted for in stark reality.
OR.
Maybe the leavers can tell us the solutions and what's good about brexit and win the remainers over...but why should they when they've already won?
And this bloke is their bright new hope, apparently.
I seriously believe that some of them will have discussed trying to take credit for abolishing roaming charges too.
Keep it coming, you muppets, and watch that YouGov tracker...
@PragueAddick
@Chaz Hill
@Fiiish
The Momentum branch of Charlton spouting the usual rubbish!
Momentum? Please...
Ukip got around 4m votes before the referendum, afterwards they have returned to being an irrelevance. This is partly because they are nutters, partly because they have attracted some extreme right wingers and partly because voters thought that the decision had been made. Ukip appears to have gone further to the right in the last 18 months.
To whom might disaffected brexitiers turn if we are denied what we were promised? There is no party apart from ukip. None of the regular parties are offering an option to get out of the EU if May screws us over as some thinks she might.
No, thought not.
- staying in the CU/SM
- no hard border
- free movement with the EU
- but we can make sure Brits get priority for jobs and being treated on the NHS
- £350m a week to be spent on the NHS
- blue passports
- keeping all of the benefits of EU membership
- but we don't have to adhere to ECJ rulings
- we can fish our own fish to local extinction
- we wouldn't have MEPs anymore
- but our influence as a global superpower would more than make up for that and the EU would be begging to do what we wanted
- and all the other non-EU countries would be lining up around the block to get us into the EU
- also making sure none of the Muslims from Turkey, Libya and Syria get into the UK
Forgive me if I forgot anything.
While we're on the subject then. What is the difference between a soft and a hard brexit? What does brexit mean to you in practical terms? Or even in philosophical terms? What will be the benefit of brexit in your eyes?
Go on, answer it. Why do you not do so? And to his last question, I am especially interested in whether you can answer it in the context of your own daily life as a normal and, I perceive, fairly typical British citizen.
Brexit, amongst other things is being able to decide on who fishes in our waters, not being in the Euro (it's coming), not having to undertake 40 hours of classes to drive a lorry, being free of ever closer political union and more recently being able to control our immigration if we choose to.
I would accept a trading group and certain restrictions this would bring if it was fair and equitable.
The EU influences just about every part of our daily lives. Many are good, some are bad. To continue to trade with the EU block our traders who export to them will still necessarily have to conform to their regulations.
until a deal is struck, we won't know how much will change.
Beyond that, a number of people on here have pretty coherent arguments as to why they would not agree with you. Whether a majority of citizens are now moving towards their rather than your POV is an open question, but I fail to see the grounds on which you brand them "not sensible". Maybe you feel alone because the counterpoint posts are usually not arguments but just trolling.
What I find slightly sinister is this suggestion that you place that if Brexit is not executed according to how you define it, there will be public unrest. This public suggestion is becoming more common. "If you don't give us the hard Brexit we voted for, there will be trouble on the streets". We have already seen where that ends, haven't we?
The problem I have with it is this. What are the political issues which have previously caused violent unrest in the UK? It has been a while, but they are: The Poll Tax, the miners strike, and Wapping. Plus localised issues between communities and the police. In all those cases I could empathise with the very personal issues which affected many of those protesting violently. But Brexit? I mean come on, are you telling me that you feel like smashing up your local town hall because lorry drivers have to do 40 hours of classes?
If people were even a tenth as angry at benefit cuts, NHS and police cuts and corruption in Westminster as they are at how many hours lorry drivers must take in classes then maybe life might be just that little bit better. People have been hypnotized into reeling off anti-EU talking points and factoids that they see on the front page of a newspaper but do any of them know how much their NHS Trust has been told to find in savings, or how many police have been taken off the front lines, or how many people have been made homeless in their area due to spending cuts?
There was mention of reciprocity between the UK and EU, should there be a leaving deal and then, hopefully, a trade agreement (but this would require some form of equivalence between the two in terms of standards). I very much doubt that UK professional drivers will have their competence accepted without an equivalent training regime.
The EU is preparing for no deal, because it is one likely outcome, as the UK has flagged. No deal may be acceptable to some, but I am less sanguine.
If I worked in haulage (between the UK and Ireland) I would be looking out for any mention of a container handling facility being introduced to an Irish port - as that, to me, would be signifying that no agreement was possible - with Irish trade to the EU and beyond bypassing the current trade route through the UK.
I do hope he isn’t unfortunate enough to work for Carillion.