Brexit discussion thread IV

FrancieBrady

VinLieger wrote: »

Out of the EU how exactly? Like Ukraine are out of the EU? Like Norway are out of the EU? Like Canada are out of the EU? Like Turkey are out of the EU? Or none of the above?


?

Or like how Nigel and other Leavers used to want out of the EU before their volte face?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY

The undenialable fact here is, we do not have a clue what the people want because they were told lie upon lie before the Referendum and since.

But hell rub it up them on that because not one politician of backbone has emerged to seek that oppurtunity for them, now that we know what Leaving actually means.

An Claidheamh

blinding wrote: »

[HTML][/HTML]
Roll on to the 29th of March next year . The British should go on World trade rules and get on with it .

Let the Eu quislings swing in the wind .

Then the British are idiots, blinding, and will break up their barely held together "country".

VinLieger

blinding wrote: »

World Trade Rules is the most out of the Eu so that is the way to go .

Your banned again but im going to just point out that once again unsurprisingly you didn't answer the question.


Have a think and if you come back maybe try again.


Which option did everyone voting leave think they were choosing?

Gerry T

blinding wrote:

Even with all this the People voted for Brexit . There is no basis what so ever that the People Voted for a soft Brexit .

Apart from the leaflet saying this:

"Some argue little would
change if we left the EU. But
there are no guarantees UK
customers would keep these
benefits if we left."

If I read this I would think there's every possibility of keeping EU benefits. So untrue without a good deal...there's no mention of removing freedom of movement, other that EU citizens would have to wait 4 yrs to get access to benefits. No mention of putting up a NI border, it only says the UK has control of its borders. No mention of having to apply for WTO quotas which most likely will be far worse that the UK has presently. It doesn't mention the 30 plus regulatory bodies the UK would need to replicate because it's leaving the EU ones....So instead of getting 350m a week it'll cost prob more than 350m a week to manage that.

ancapailldorcha

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Then the British are idiots, blinding, and will break up their barely held together "country".

They're not idiots. It's easy to say that on a forum where everyone's politically engaged but most people aren't so they see senior figures in government like Gove and Johnson say things and assume or presume that they know what they're on about. Obviously, if everyone were more politically astute then the world would be a better place but this isn't a specifically British problem. Then there's the fact that the voting system, built for two parties is now serving to obfuscate the will of the people instead of expressing it.

On the "barely held together" point, I think you're on to something. Scotland is very much pro-EU and more left leaning than Southern England where the power lies. Northern Ireland voted remain and now will be dragged out against its will. So half of the UK's constituent nations want out and half want to stay. This is on referendum day, mind and doesn't account for changes in opinion. I think the UK needs a serious bit of introspection and modernisation in its politics. It's too late for that but there's not even a mention of it in our so-called media.

Silent Running

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

They're not idiots. It's easy to say that on a forum where everyone's politically engaged but most people aren't so they see senior figures in government like Gove and Johnson say things and assume or presume that they know what they're on about. Obviously, if everyone were more politically astute then the world would be a better place but this isn't a specifically British problem. Then there's the fact that the voting system, built for two parties is now serving to obfuscate the will of the people instead of expressing it.

On the "barely held together" point, I think you're on to something. Scotland is very much pro-EU and more left leaning than Southern England where the power lies. Northern Ireland voted remain and now will be dragged out against its will. So half of the UK's constituent nations want out and half want to stay. This is on referendum day, mind and doesn't account for changes in opinion. I think the UK needs a serious bit of introspection and modernisation in its politics. It's too late for that but there's not even a mention of it in our so-called media.

Not to mention the massive vote in London to remain.

murphaph

blinding wrote: »

Do you believe that the People that read that government funded leaflet wanted a soft Brexit ? They want out of the Eu .

I suspect that while they do want out of the EU they want it less than to have their food brought to them by the army.

There was no mention of food/medicine shortages in main stream media before the referendum.

Frank Bullitt

This is a highlight of the earlier report published about the expected mess at Dover.

300 million declarations a year extra...

trellheim

ACD thats an interesting points. Did anyone look into why London voted remain ? many places like Sunderland voted to leave supposedly because of immigration. However London has huge immigration and a Remain vote. Why the difference ... and its not a stupid answer I suppose - it would be easy to . Suspect its something to do with employment destruction everywhere else.

First Up

Gintonious wrote: »

This is a highlight of the earlier report published about the expected mess at Dover.

300 million declarations a year extra...

Sky quoting a "secret" report about plans for a 13 mile lorry park on the M20 for trucks queuing for Dover.

Silent Running

First Up wrote: »

Sky quoting a "secret" report about plans for a 13 mile lorry park on the M20 for trucks queuing for Dover.

According to that report, it won't be enough to contain the tailback.

First Up

Gintonious wrote: »

This is a highlight of the earlier report published about the expected mess at Dover.

300 million declarations a year extra...

Yes, Sky quoting the "secret" report about plans for a 13 mile lorry park on the M20 for trucks queuing for Dover.

Hurrache

First Up wrote: »

Sky quoting a "secret" report about plans for a 13 mile lorry park on the M20 for trucks queuing for Dover.

First Up wrote: »

Yes, Sky quoting the "secret" report about plans for a 13 mile lorry park on the M20 for trucks queuing for Dover.

What am I missing with the point you're making?

ArthurDayne

trellheim wrote: »

ACD thats an interesting points.    Did anyone look into why London voted remain ?     many places like Sunderland voted to leave supposedly because of immigration.  However London has huge immigration and a Remain vote.  Why the difference ...  and its not   a stupid answer I suppose - it would be easy to .  Suspect its something to do with employment destruction everywhere else.

There are quite a few probable reasons.  London has huge immigration yes, so with that comes a large immigrant and immigrant-descended population who would have been much less likely to vote along anti-immigration lines.  Added to that is the fact that diversity is a long-established phenomenon in London whereby people see it as a strength and part of London's culture, rather than being a cultural threat. 
Another big reason is London's business community.  With all due respect, one might find themselves having an easier time explaining the benefits of financial services passporting to a random sample of people on the streets of the Square Mile at lunchtime than they would on the streets of Sunderland or Scarborough.  People working in London are often working in the Global HQ or European HQ/Hub of their business, and as such are more acutely aware of the ties that bind under the myriad of interconnected law and regulation through the EU -- and the benefits of those ties for the ease of doing business.

lawred2

ArthurDayne wrote: »

There are quite a few probable reasons.  London has huge immigration yes, so with that comes a large immigrant and immigrant-descended population who would have been much less likely to vote along anti-immigration lines.  Added to that is the fact that diversity is a long-established phenomenon in London whereby people see it as a strength and part of London's culture, rather than being a cultural threat. 
Another big reason is London's business community.  With all due respect, one might find themselves having an easier time explaining the benefits of financial services passporting to a random sample of people on the streets of the Square Mile at lunchtime than they would on the streets of Sunderland or Scarborough.  People working in London are often working in the Global HQ or European HQ/Hub of their business, and as such are more acutely aware of the ties that bind under the myriad of interconnected law and regulation through the EU -- and the benefits of those ties for the ease of doing business.

It's cosmopolitan with undoubtedly the highest concentration of young skilled professionals in the UK - professionals who are no doubt friends and acquaintances with professional immigrants from all around the EU.. For many young people in London they see immigration in terms of shining lights..

It's an entirely different demographic from the towns and cities of former industrial northlands..

ancapailldorcha

trellheim wrote: »

ACD thats an interesting points. Did anyone look into why London voted remain ? many places like Sunderland voted to leave supposedly because of immigration. However London has huge immigration and a Remain vote. Why the difference ... and its not a stupid answer I suppose - it would be easy to . Suspect its something to do with employment destruction everywhere else.

Most areas with high levels of immigration voted remain. From The Economist:



London is a thriving, vibrant multicultural city and the beating heart of the British economy. Attempts to cry wolf here about immigrants and sovereignty largely fell on deaf ears. Most people here would know EU migrants personally and have no problem with them. Obviously, there are poorer areas that have been neglected which would likely have been leave hotspots. Then there is the financial sector which constitutes most of the UK economy. Enthusiastic, begrudging or apathetic financiers in the city and those in their networks aren't going to risk their futures.

Birmingham voted leave because Asian migrants believe EU migration is suppressing migration from their home countries. Vote Leave and other bodies targeted these people to great effect and Birmingham voted to leave. See below for an example:

First Up

Hurrache wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Sky quoting a "secret" report about plans for a 13 mile lorry park on the M20 for trucks queuing for Dover.

First Up wrote: »

Yes, Sky quoting the "secret" report about plans for a 13 mile lorry park on the M20 for trucks queuing for Dover.

What am I missing with the point you're making?

I don't know what you are missing but the point I'm making is that those who have to deal with the realities (as distinct from those spouting slogans and cliches) are making some pretty drastic contingency plans.

Strazdas

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Birmingham voted leave because Asian migrants believe EU migration is suppressing migration from their home countries. Vote Leave and other bodies targeted these people to great effect and Birmingham voted to leave. See below for an example:

Absolute lies of course. Immigration from non EU countries to the UK is much higher than that from the EU.

VinLieger

Question about the dover queues and parking lot, do hauliers get paid only when driving/moving or will they also be paid for any time they spend waiting in these overflow parking lots?


If its the former id also expect to see some trucker strikes about contract changes due to the new realities of spending hours/days waiting in traffic or parked up

Hurrache

First Up wrote: »

I don't know what you are missing but the point I'm making is that those who have to deal with the realities (as distinct from those spouting slogans and cliches) are making some pretty drastic contingency plans.

Ah, the obvious point. The double quotes were throwing me.

First Up

Hurrache wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

I don't know what you are missing but the point I'm making is that those who have to deal with the realities (as distinct from those spouting slogans and cliches) are making some pretty drastic contingency plans.

Ah, the obvious point. The double quotes were throwing me.

Just an edit.

Sam Russell

Gintonious wrote: »

This is a highlight of the earlier report published about the expected mess at Dover.

300 million declarations a year extra...

At GB£35 a pop, those declarations will cost UK exporters and importers GB£10.5 billion per year which coincidentally is the current UK contribution to the EU.

Oh, the irony.

First Up

Sam Russell wrote: »

Gintonious wrote: »

This is a highlight of the earlier report published about the expected mess at Dover.

300 million declarations a year extra...

At GB£35 a pop, those declarations will cost UK exporters and importers GB£10.5 billion per year which coincidentally is the current UK contribution to the EU.

Oh, the irony.

It will also cost time, which will wipe out a sizeable part of the fresh food business and disrupt most JIT supply chains.

Econ__

trellheim wrote: »

ACD thats an interesting points. Did anyone look into why London voted remain ? many places like Sunderland voted to leave supposedly because of immigration. However London has huge immigration and a Remain vote. Why the difference ... and its not a stupid answer I suppose - it would be easy to . Suspect its something to do with employment destruction everywhere else.

Basically, many areas of England are underdeveloped or have been 'left behind'. Although these areas typically have extremely low levels of immigration, the Daily Mail has managed to tap into underlying xenophobic tendencies and convince many of the inhabitants of these areas that immigrants are to blame for everything.


It really is that simple but few politicians will dare admit it. They instead choose to pander to these 'concerns' and 'anxieties'.

J Mysterio

UK Independent are campaigning hard for a second referendum and have even got their own petition going. 390,000 signatures at present.

lawred2

Sam Russell wrote: »

At GB£35 a pop, those declarations will cost UK exporters and importers GB£10.5 billion per year which coincidentally is the current UK contribution to the EU.

Oh, the irony.

Where did you get the £35 figure from? Is that a standard tariff?

Nody

VinLieger wrote: »

Question about the dover queues and parking lot, do hauliers get paid only when driving/moving or will they also be paid for any time they spend waiting in these overflow parking lots?


If its the former id also expect to see some trucker strikes about contract changes due to the new realities of spending hours/days waiting in traffic or parked up

Depends on their exact contract but going from the companies I've worked with there's usually a fixed fee per hour capped at around 10h a day of waiting fee for delays not caused by the hauler (i.e. bad weather, queues etc.). The amount paid is no were near as profitable compared to having the truck rolling however...

LuckyLloyd

Gintonious wrote: »

For anyone that would like to see this, i'ts really something.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/996750/Brexit-news-fresh-sandwich-project-fear-BBC-Brexit-latest-Marcus-Fysh-Newsnight

"Project Fear hits NEW LOW: Expert warns no-deal Brexit will spark SANDWICH FAMINE in UK"

And that's how it works folks.

Roger_007

J Mysterio wrote: »

UK Independent are campaigning hard for a second referendum and have even got their own petition going. 390,000 signatures at present.

There is much talk in the UK media about a second referendum, but what would be the question?
If the referendum asks the people to vote on whether to accept or reject in total whatever exit deal is negotiated, that would lead to the messiest campaign in history. There are so many complex issues involved that the result of the referendum would be probably be to reject because everyone would find something they didn't agree with. If the deal is rejected, what then?
If the referendum asks the people to simply reverse Brexit and cancel their Article 50 application, that would be much simpler but as far as I know, nobody is pushing for this.

fash

blinding wrote: »

A soft Brexit was not on offer in the referendum . Mr Cameron made this clear .

Neither the Labour Party or the Conservative party (total 84% vote ) had anything about a soft Brexit in their manifestos . They actually explicitly said they would respect the Cameron Referendum .

Considering that 48.1% of the voters alone wanted a "so soft it is non existent" Brexit, we can safely assume that the "Will of the People" © was for the softest possible Brexit - a Norway plus plus plus solution.
I think you will agree that the will of the people in this matter should be respected.