Brexit Referendum Superthread

demfad

Thomas__ wrote: »

The perfect credentials to either start WWIII or a world revolution once the ordinary people start to say enough is enough and some of them have already started to say that. Plenty examples from history where the small oligarchy has been overthrown by the masses of the people once the people have been pushed too far by the "1%" and such things often ended in bloodshed. The question is just, who´s going to start it, who´s going to win and what will come afterwards, unless that other lunatic in NK is starting a nuclear war soon. He´s pushing the world towards such a conflict and it looks very serious these days, with the other tetchy moron in the WH. It´s just the Chinese who appear to keep cool headed and rational, but I don´t know for how long yet. I know that this passage is not concerning this thread, but in the bigger picture, it is relevant because in the event of a nuc war, that would plunge the whole world into catastrophe, Brexit has a very small meaning then. It means that the far-right and right-wing idiots behind Trump and Brexit who strife to ruin this world would achieve their aim faster than they thought, just that it won´t play out the way they wish for.

They want a 'multi-polar' world as they call it with the traditional powers having regions of influence. The lessons from history is that this does not work/ends with war through old geo-political tensions in hot spots.

The reason IMO they want a multi-polar world is so that the Liberal world order breaks up and they can return to the imperical/authoritarian/religious ethos rule of old.
I don't think they would have a problem with large empires again. The problem is with the liberal order necessary to keep the peace in Europe, the problem is these lefties want to spread the wealth around too much.

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British were one of the key members that changed it. Jeez, the victim mentality people have inherited from Farage's dangerous nonsense is extraordinary.




It isn't a twist, it is what you said.

And I didn't ask you what you 'think' might happen.

I asked you 'are you prepared to take a hit to take back 'control'?' Simple question

Personally i would take the risk (but i dont think it will happen) because while in the EU member states are being dragged along instead of helping steer and also the EU is too slow to respond to events.

For example Merkal is responsible for the refugee/migrant crisis. Everybody knows this and says no more but her and others agenda over rules all and that is 100% wrong.

123shooter

demfad wrote: »

I don't think they would have a problem with large empires again. The problem is with the liberal order necessary to keep the peace in Europe, the problem is these lefties want to spread the wealth around too much.

I think the problem is the multi-nationals have seized the chance and steer the lefties in the way they want. So really the lefties/liberals/socialists are all jumping to the multinationals tune.

People living in poor countries have no cash to buy goods so 1st world economies can only grow at certain rate........let all poor countries emigrate to western countries. At very least they get state handouts and are able to become consumers and buy lots of goodies from multinationals.

Thomas__

123shooter wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What would need to happen for you to think this was a mistake? Just curious. Are you prepared to take a massive hit to the economy to be free and to be back in 'control'?

At last a sensible question.

If a massive hit happens then it just wont be the UK so everybody will be taking a hit and none more than Ireland who is more exposed than any country.  I dont think this massive hit will happen.

Back on to your question and now in hindsight.   Would you have asked same to all those in 1916 and the following years.  I think your answer may be yes you would want to be free.

Not answering for him, but I don´t see the comparison between Easter 1916 and this Brexit folly to be appropriate. 1916 endet in a disaster, caused by the action of one single foolishly acting co-conspirator, Eoin MacNeill, which left a massive part of the bulk of the Irish Volunteers to stand down and thus causing the problems those in Dublin and other places had to get reinforcements when needed. It was no folly, with hindsight, it was the start of a development that finally brought about freedom for Ireland, even if was just partially but at least it was something and that ended in the 1949 Republic of Ireland Act. Brexit is quite different because the Brits know about the risks they´re taking when leaving the EU by a hard Brexit. And more to the point, the EU is no such colonial power and Institution as the UK was back then in 1916.  

Freedom for Ireland was essential for the Irish People, to get rid of her colonial master. Brexit is good enough for the Brits to commit economical suicide and finish them off by their own hands and deeds. Well, I won´t say that they deserve it after all what they have done to Ireland, but I can´t hold back some satisfaction when looking at them going down a road where they will finally get the bill for their sheer arrogance which the Brexiteers surely deserve, as the majority of the Brits voted for both parties who are pleged to deliver Brexit again in the past GE. Pity for the shrinking amount of remainers, they had deserved better, but as it happened, not all of them got up their arses to walk to the polling stations last year and cast their votes.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

Personally i would take the risk (but i dont think it will happen) because while in the EU member states are being dragged along instead of helping steer and also the EU is too slow to respond to events.

For example Merkal is responsible for the refugee/migrant crisis. Everybody knows this and says no more but her and others agenda over rules all and that is 100% wrong.

I think the problems in the Middle East are responsible for the refugee/migrant crisis. But that's for another thread.

Can I ask you another question and the important one. For how long would you be happy to take a hit? How long before the much touted nirvana hoves into view is acceptable to you?

Again I am not really interested in what you think might happen, if you could answer what i asked.

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think the problems in the Middle East are responsible for the refugee/migrant crisis. But that's for another thread.

Can I ask you another question and the important one. For how long would you be happy to take a hit? How long before the much touted nirvana hoves into view is acceptable to you?

Again I am not really interested in what you think might happen, if you could answer what i asked.

I said yes take a hit...........if it were to happen the hit as you call it wont last forever and the UK is a major economy not like Ireland. who also took a hit in 2008 because they also wouldnt listen that you cant spend money you dont have.

Ireland being a bit of a banana republic with no economy except by letting multinationals employ them without paying tax and although wanting their own freedom 100 years ago the first time anybody offered to look after them again because they couldnt steer their own country.......they ran too with open arms and gave everything.

Now you may think that is a really bad thing to say, distorted and all but no different to what you are saying with all your doom and gloom regards UK and Brexit and why?......simply because 'YOU' not the UK do not want Brexit to happen.

Calina

Merkel is _not_ responsible for the refugee crisis. She did not cause the civil war in Syria and Germany were not the cheerleaders of Iraq and Afghanistan related military actions.

The question of stability in the Middle East is a not one to which there is a simplistic answer but the refugee crisis has its roots. At best you could state the US and UK have taken actions recently and immediately after the second world war which has led to where we are today with a major civil war destroying peoples lives in Syria and parts of Iraq which people understandably want to escape. It is not Merkel's fault they are trying to escape Syria and other locations. You'd just let people drown in their thousands? Both the UK and the US are pulling the isolationist act now, strange that.

Bit of reading rec: Silk Roads by Peter Frankopan. It will open your eyes.

In the mean time, key trade deals have been blocked by the UK cf India as have industry protection measures cf steel/Wales.

In the meantime UK growth is dropping by comparison to all its EU peers, as is wage growth. I am sure you are will to risk the hit, yeah. It has started. I suspect there is azlimit to how much hit you will take though.

Fratton Fred

Thomas__ wrote: »

The perfect credentials to either start WWIII or a world revolution once the ordinary people start to say enough is enough and some of them have already started to say that. Plenty examples from history where the small oligarchy has been overthrown by the masses of the people once the people have been pushed too far by the "1%" and such things often ended in bloodshed. The question is just, who´s going to start it, who´s going to win and what will come afterwards, unless that other lunatic in NK is starting a nuclear war soon. He´s pushing the world towards such a conflict and it looks very serious these days, with the other tetchy moron in the WH. It´s just the Chinese who appear to keep cool headed and rational, but I don´t know for how long yet. I know that this passage is not concerning this thread, but in the bigger picture, it is relevant because in the event of a nuc war, that would plunge the whole world into catastrophe, Brexit has a very small meaning then. It means that the far-right and right-wing idiots behind Trump and Brexit who strife to ruin this world would achieve their aim faster than they thought, just that it won´t play out the way they wish for.

seriously? the people behind Trump and Brexit could well start the next world war?

And there's methinking the politics forum was for sensible discussion?

demfad wrote: »

They want a 'multi-polar' world as they call it with the traditional powers having regions of influence. The lessons from history is that this does not work/ends with war through old geo-political tensions in hot spots.

The reason IMO they want a multi-polar world is so that the Liberal world order breaks up and they can return to the imperical/authoritarian/religious ethos rule of old.
I don't think they would have a problem with large empires again. The problem is with the liberal order necessary to keep the peace in Europe, the problem is these lefties want to spread the wealth around too much.

lefties like People before Profit?

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

I said yes take a hit...........if it were to happen the hit as you call it wont last forever and the UK is a major economy not like Ireland. who also took a hit in 2008 because they also wouldnt listen that you cant spend money you dont have.

.

Could you possibly answer the question without the off topic stuff?

For how long would you be happy to take a hit? How long before the much touted nirvana hoves into view is acceptable to you?

demfad

123shooter wrote: »

I think the problem is the multi-nationals have seized the chance and steer the lefties in the way they want. So really the lefties/liberals/socialists are all jumping to the multinationals tune.

People living in poor countries have no cash to buy goods so 1st world economies can only grow at certain rate........let all poor countries emigrate to western countries. At very least they get state handouts and are able to become consumers and buy lots of goodies from multinationals.

The multinationals have far more power with the RW than the left. There are more billionaires in Trumps cabinet than it any time relatively in US history, by a long way.
The multinationals hold sway over all Countries and States but they control the Republican and Tory parties. Look at Trump derulating Wall Street already. They don't control left wing parties. That said, the left wing must deal with Global Finance.

Fratton Fred

demfad wrote: »

The multinationals have far more power with the RW than the left. There are more billionaires in Trumps cabinet than it any time relatively in US history, by a long way.
The multinationals hold sway over all Countries and States but they control the Republican and Tory parties. Look at Trump derulating Wall Street already. They don't control left wing parties. That said, the left wing must deal with Global Finance.

it would be very easy to come to the conclusion that the eu benefits multinationals more than any other.

Sam Russell

Billy86 wrote: »

"They'll want superior British cars to that cheap Japanese crap. It's well known the Japanese are no good at making automobiles."

Guaranteed to hear line of reasoning that a few times in the coming while so.

But they are Japanese cars - built by Japanese robots. Even the Mini is a German car that has nothing to link it to the BMC Mini apart from the name.

Rover are Over for a long time now - and may they rust in piece.

seamus

Fratton Fred wrote: »

it would be very easy to come to the conclusion that the eu benefits multinationals more than any other.

Absolutely.
However, as an institution it does find a good balance. On the one hand multinationals get access to a large single market without incurring the overhead of HQs in multiple jurisdictions.
On the other hand the EU maintains a stronger regulatory hand over multinationals than most other countries.

On balance, the population of the EU as a whole is better protected from multinationals and better serviced by multinationals, than they would be if they were segregated jurisdictions.

Issues arise if the EU moves towards a more libertarian format like the US and allows multinationals to dictate policy.

That's when member states should examine the prospect of leaving the single market and taking back regulatory control.

Fratton Fred

seamus wrote: »

Absolutely.
However, as an institution it does find a good balance. On the one hand multinationals get access to a large single market without incurring the overhead of HQs in multiple jurisdictions.
On the other hand the EU maintains a stronger regulatory hand over multinationals than most other countries.

On balance, the population of the EU as a whole is better protected from multinationals and better serviced by multinationals, than they would be if they were segregated jurisdictions.

Issues arise if the EU moves towards a more libertarian format like the US and allows multinationals to dictate policy.

That's when member states should examine the prospect of leaving the single market and taking back regulatory control.

it also allows Multinationals to manufacture in a low cost country, sell in a high value market and pay tax in a low tax country, thereby getting the best of all worlds.

you might want to check out all the multinationals that have offices close to the european parliament buildings in Luxembourg as well, before deciding how much influence they have on policy.

And, of course, the eu president seems to ne one their side https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/01/jean-claude-juncker-blocked-eu-curbs-on-tax-avoidance-cables-show

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Could you possibly answer the question without the off topic stuff?

Can you ask me what I am supposed to answer cause I am honestly lost to know what I haven't answered?

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British were one of the key members that changed it. Jeez, the victim mentality people have inherited from Farage's dangerous nonsense is extraordinary.

Possibly but it is what the people were asked to vote for. Not what they were actually voting for.

123shooter

Thomas__ wrote: »

Freedom for Ireland was essential for the Irish People, to get rid of her colonial master. Brexit is good enough for the Brits to commit economical suicide and finish them off by their own hands and deeds. Well, I won´t say that they deserve it after all what they have done to Ireland, but I can´t hold back some satisfaction when looking at them going down a road where they will finally get the bill for their sheer arrogance which the Brexiteers surely deserve, as the majority of the Brits voted for both parties who are pleged to deliver Brexit again in the past GE. Pity for the shrinking amount of remainers, they had deserved better, but as it happened, not all of them got up their arses to walk to the polling stations last year and cast their votes.

Again just your point of view and nothing else.

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think the problems in the Middle East are responsible for the refugee/migrant crisis. But that's for another thread.

No admittedly the wars and who are causing them is one thing but the migrant crisis was all down to Merkal saying everybody come here to Europe which is where they are all coming and still no explanation why.....(multinationals ???).

The refugees and migrants do not appear to be going anywhere near them en mass.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

Can you ask me what I am supposed to answer cause I am honestly lost to know what I haven't answered?

Very simple, you have said you don't mind if you take a hit.

I asked you for how long is that ok?

123shooter wrote: »

Possibly but it is what the people were asked to vote for. Not what they were actually voting for.

They were voting STAY OR LEAVE on the basis of lies, mistruths and very little clear information about what was likely to happen.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

No admittedly the wars and who are causing them is one thing but the migrant crisis was all down to Merkal saying everybody come here to Europe which is where they are all coming and still no explanation why.....(multinationals ???).

The refugees and migrants do not appear to be going anywhere near them en mass.

Simplistic and way off topic.

Billy86

Sam Russell wrote: »

But they are Japanese cars - built by Japanese robots. Even the Mini is a German car that has nothing to link it to the BMC Mini apart from the name.

Rover are Over for a long time now - and may they rust in piece.

"It's British, Stay British!"

Jesus, could actually see that one catching on! :pac:

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Very simple, you have said you don't mind if you take a hit.

I asked you for how long is that ok?

Sorry I thought I answered this way back. If there is a hit which I don't think they will be because they will eventually thrash out some deal as if there is a hit it will hurt everybody and Ireland possibly the most...........so if there is a hit I dont know how long it would take to recover (who does) but it won't last forever.

With all the bravado talk the EU cannot impose a hit on the UK because they will suffer also, so either everybody involved is a complete idiot (besides drunker) or they will all eventually keep quiet and sort it out.

I see 2 dangers to it all..........one is the world economy collapsing which some say there is a danger or some half baked leader using Brexit as an excuse to bash the UK to deflect away from home problems.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

Sorry I thought I answered this way back. If there is a hit which I don't think they will be because they will eventually thrash out some deal as if there is a hit it will hurt everybody and Ireland possibly the most...........so if there is a hit I dont know how long it would take to recover (who does) but it won't last forever.

With all the bravado talk the EU cannot impose a hit on the UK because they will suffer also, so either everybody involved is a complete idiot (besides drunker) or they will all eventually keep quiet and sort it out.

I see 2 dangers to it all..........one is the world economy collapsing which some say there is a danger or some half baked leader using Brexit as an excuse to bash the UK to deflect away from home problems.

It really was a simple question.
Once more.

How long is it ok to take a hit for. (I am presuming you don't want to be taking a hit forever, i.e. if the economy permanently destroyed)

Zubeneschamali

123shooter wrote: »

in both cases of Trump and Brexit they were elected and voted for by the majoriaty of the people?

Trump was not voted in by a majority - Hiilary got 3 million more votes, and only the peculiarities of the Electoral College system saw Trump elected.

123shooter

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Trump was not voted in by a majority - Hiilary got 3 million more votes, and only the peculiarities of the Electoral College system saw Trump elected.

But he still won by the rules of the USA voting system just like anybody else would have in same situation even Clinton.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

But he still won by the rules of the USA voting system just like anybody else would have in same situation even Clinton.

Stop saying the majority voted for him maybe?

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It really was a simple question.
Once more.

How long is it ok to take a hit for. (I am presuming you don't want to be taking a hit forever, i.e. if the economy permanently destroyed)

I don't know what you mean? Do you mean that the UK would take a hit and then come running back to the EU to join or something so its economy doesnt get destroyed?........if so thats laughable.

Zubeneschamali

123shooter wrote: »

Back on to your question and now in hindsight. Would you have asked same to all those in 1916 and the following years. I think your answer may be yes you would want to be free.

No, I think 1916 was a criminal mistake.

123shooter

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Stop saying the majority voted for him maybe?

That wasnt the actual point I was making even though I said it for both cases but its lost in the posts.

FrancieBrady

123shooter wrote: »

I don't know what you mean? Do you mean that the UK would take a hit and then come running back to the EU to join or something so its economy doesnt get destroyed?........if so thats laughable.

I am asking you how long is it acceptable for you to take a hit, presuming you think it is abnormal to be taking a hit.

How long are you prepared to say that control is better than a depressed economy.

The answer will be a number.