Will Britain ever just piss off and get on with Brexit? -mod warning in OP (21/12)

Harvey Weinstein

Our entire situation here in Ireland is predicated on there not being a recession. If there is a serious recession, the we are totally f*cked.
I don't think people realise just how f*cked we are if there is another global downturn. Going to the IMF or expecting a bailout like the last time will not be an option this time. We'll basically have to hand over our entire country.
I'm getting serious vibes of arrogance and delusion from Irish people lately...similar to what occurred before the last crash. Total denial.

Harvey Weinstein

Sadly for those in the UK who voted on the basis of immigration (most of them) The opposite of what they expect is going to happen. Immigration will ramp up like they won't believe, just from Africa and the Middle East rather than from the EU.
Both Boris and Farage have clearly stated that this will happen.

pjohnson

Seathrun66 wrote: »

Not borne out by the recent by-elections in Wexford and Dublin. Verona Murphy slagging off immigrants and Emer Higgins insulting Travellers both got soundly beaten.

But they did great in the Casey style "loosing miserably is really actually winning".

Casey is the most sucessful failure to some.

The electorate here dont give the demented fringe a sniff of power. Unlike the Brits.

MadYaker

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

Our entire situation here in Ireland is predicated on there not being a recession. If there is a serious recession, the we are totally f*cked.
I don't think people realise just how f*cked we are if there is another global downturn. Going to the IMF or expecting a bailout like the last time will not be an option this time. We'll basically have to hand over our entire country.
I'm getting serious vibes of arrogance and delusion from Irish people lately...similar to what occurred before the last crash. Total denial.

We’re better prepared for a recession now than we were last time around and we bounced back from that one pretty quickly. Why so pessimistic? Our economy is still showing small amounts of growth, the government has widened the tax base significantly since the last recession. A recession would obviously be bad but not as bad as you’re making out to be.

davedanon

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

Well you seem triggered anyway.

Woo. Hooray for you. If you mean that I'm pissed off, then yes. I think you're a fücking arsehole, to be honest. But I still want an answer. Why do you feel the need to call yourself after a rapist/sexual predator? Why?

Harvey Weinstein

davedanon wrote: »

Woo. Hooray for you. If you mean that I'm pissed off, then yes. I think you're a fücking arsehole, to be honest. But I still want an answer. Why do you feel the need to call yourself after a rapist/sexual predator? Why?

I will re reg. It is rather Tasteless, especially since he seems to be getting away with his abominable crimes by paying his way out of trouble.

davedanon

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

I will re reg. It is rather Tasteless, especially since he seems to be getting away with his abominable crimes by paying his way out of trouble.

I think that is wise. Your subsequent posts might get a fairer hearing henceforth too.

davedanon

And if you do re-reg, I'll be happy to start with a clean slate, and see how things go.

Snickers Man

davedanon wrote: »

It's possible, not likely, but possible, that the UK, or maybe just England&Wales, could be a lethal and toxic binary society composed exclusively of a wealthy tech cohort and a malignant underclass, with no middle-class at all left.

That is precisely what some of the arch brexiteers are demanding should happen. They've seen it happen before; they think it's a great idea!!

Have a look at the David Starkey lecture referred to in an earlier post. If you don't want to sit through the whole lot skip directly to 19 minutes in where he talks about the difference between liberalism and converatism in the 19th century. Liberalism, in the classic sense, was based on capitalism which in turn depended on industrialisation and international trade. Conservatism was rooted in tradition and a strong sense of nationhood.

He focusses on Disraeli and compares his observations to the situation today.

Disraeli, he says (19mins), talks about the Two Nations, rich and poor who have little to do with each other.

Then [19min 50] he says: "Disraelii is the man who asks the question what can the social basis of Conservatism be? What is its nature?
What goes on in the 1830s.. is an extremely rapid multiplication of the British economy, the ascendant supremacy of freedom of trade,.. a notable increase in the wealth divide, the creation of a mercantile and commercial elite which is fundamentally liberal, which is wedded to notions of non national values…. It is archetypically “anywhere”.
The whole fundamental of capitalism and liberalism is …generalised rules, an absence of national frontiers, a willingness to trade anything with anybody combined with the universalism of the 18th century, the idea that you have a duty to humanity as a whole, not just your national grouping.

This of course has strong parallels with the "globalised" nature of world trade today. The much decried "neoliberalism" which many blame for economic inequalities.

The approach of Disraeli in the 19th century has strong parallels with what his successors are trying to do today.

From 24min 34s
Disraeli sees…. that a conservative party has to be a social alliance between the top and the bottom founded upon a passionate sense of national identity and nationhood. In other words, as against the Liberal in the middle which is fundamentally “anywhere”, they are the “somewheres”. They are those with that rooted sense, that sense of past, that sense of community, that sense of belonging. It does seem to me that this is a fundamental observation and one with obviously direct relevance to the present.”

So that is what the intelligentsia pushing Brexit have in mind for us. And you can see the demonisation of the middle, the contempt for "educated elites" the undesirability of having a global or multicultural outlook. It can go so far as making a political point out of deriding certain people for consuming "avocado toast" and "lattes".

That speech puts all the bile of Farrage et al into context. The claim that "ordinary" or "little" people defied the elites to push Brexit through. It's one part of the "Conservative Alliance" between very rich and very poor that Disraeli exploited 150 years ago.

KildareP

pjohnson wrote: »

But they did great in the Casey style "loosing miserably is really actually winning".

Casey is the most sucessful failure to some.

The electorate here dont give the demented fringe a sniff of power. Unlike the Brits.

Casey came from well at the bottom to comfortably second overnight.

Is that safe to ignore?

Everone thought Trump would be humiliated.
That Brexit wouldn’t pass.
Johnson would be shortest PM in living history.

The electorate here are just as quick to put in dangerous people - FF have been an electoral success because of it despite having the most dangerous economically reckless leaders this country has seen.

theological

KildareP wrote: »

You don't fix a problem by simply shouting the people who have a different opinion to you (whether right or wrong) as bigots, racists, fascists, etc.

Just as the UK won't fix their woes by blaming the EU for everything that has gone wrong.

For me it is pretty straightforward. This conversation is three and a half years out of date.

In 2016 a majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union and chart their own course outside. You may not agree but that's an entirely respectable choice.

In 2017 the British people voted for parties that promised to honour the referendum result. Labour at that time stated they would leave the EU.

In 2019 Labour committed to a second referendum. The British public were fed up of their decision in 2016 not being respected and constantly being told that their decision didn't matter.

On Thursday I voted for the Conservatives. I voted for them for two reasons:

Despite being a remain voter in 2016 I felt that after the referendum the result of the British people should be respected. The mucking around by MPs on this issue was disrespectful to the British public who voted to leave. Get Brexit done struck a chord with me and the British public who are frustrated at the dithering in parliament.

The thought of Jeremy Corbyn being prime minister was terrifying. His far left policies would thrash the British economy. Their campaign became silly towards the end when it was obvious that they were just going to blow a load of cash on giveaways like free broadband and nationalising businesses.

I would say well done Boris. Everyone said he couldn't renegotiate the backstop - he did. Everyone said he wouldn't last as prime minister - he has. And he's got one of the biggest Tory majorities if not the biggest since Thatcher in 1987.

Most of all the UK has a stable government. With 80 MPs in majority Boris will be able to sort the withdrawal bill out and set a clear policy platform which is good for Britain.

davedanon

davedanon wrote: »

It's possible, not likely, but possible, that the UK, or maybe just England&Wales, could be a lethal and toxic binary society composed exclusively of a wealthy tech cohort and a malignant underclass, with no middle-class at all left.

I've been approached by two different tech firms this week who are moving their operations from London to Dublin due to Brexit. I don't think the election result will have any affect on their plans to move as one of them have already moved their entire sales department from London to Dublin.

Dyr

KildareP wrote: »

Casey came from well at the bottom to comfortably second overnight.

Is that safe to ignore?

Everone thought Trump would be humiliated.
That Brexit wouldn’t pass.
Johnson would be shortest PM in living history.

The electorate here are just as quick to put in dangerous people - FF have been an electoral success because of it despite having the most dangerous economically reckless leaders this country has seen.

Casey only did well because people in areas like Rathkeale are all racists, for some weird reason

easypazz

theological wrote: »

For me it is pretty straightforward. This conversation is three and a half years out of date.

In 2016 a majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union and chart their own course outside. You may not agree but that's an entirely respectable choice.

In 2017 the British people voted for parties that promised to honour the referendum result. Labour at that time stated they would leave the EU.

In 2019 Labour committed to a second referendum. The British public were fed up of their decision in 2016 not being respected and constantly being told that their decision didn't matter.

On Thursday I voted for the Conservatives. I voted for them for two reasons:

Despite being a remain voter in 2016 I felt that after the referendum the result of the British people should be respected. The mucking around by MPs on this issue was disrespectful to the British public who voted to leave. Get Brexit done struck a chord with me and the British public who are frustrated at the dithering in parliament.

The thought of Jeremy Corbyn being prime minister was terrifying. His far left policies would thrash the British economy. Their campaign became silly towards the end when it was obvious that they were just going to blow a load of cash on giveaways like free broadband and nationalising businesses.

I would say well done Boris. Everyone said he couldn't renegotiate the backstop - he did. Everyone said he wouldn't last as prime minister - he has. And he's got one of the biggest Tory majorities if not the biggest since Thatcher in 1987.

Most of all the UK has a stable government. With 80 MPs in majority Boris will be able to sort the withdrawal bill out and set a clear policy platform which is good for Britain.

I dont think he renegotiated the backstop, he just reverted to a previous proposal, border down the Irish sea.

This proposal had EU support but not UK support originally.

This election may trigger Scottish independence.

Northern Ireland unionists have been thrown under a bus by the Tory mothership.

This one has a long way to run and there could be long term destruction of the union.

Or we could see a very soft brexit where nothing really changes.

Dyr

theological wrote: »

For me it is pretty straightforward. This conversation is three and a half years out of date.

In 2016 a majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union and chart their own course outside. You may not agree but that's an entirely respectable choice.

In 2017 the British people voted for parties that promised to honour the referendum result. Labour at that time stated they would leave the EU.

In 2019 Labour committed to a second referendum. The British public were fed up of their decision in 2016 not being respected and constantly being told that their decision didn't matter.

A few months ago I was spending time with people from the UK, turned out they were all remain voters (some strong remain) but they were all of the opinion that leave had won and that was that, Britain needed to leave and be done with it.

It's funny that most people blame Cameron on the whole debacle, but it was red Len McCluskey backing the wrong Milliband that put Cameron in power. The same Len who's refusing to admit that his BS led to the biggest Labour hammering in modern history. I only remembered Len because he chose today of all days to send me an email to let me know my union membership fees are going up. Thats how f***kin stupid Len is.

theological

easypazz wrote: »

I dont think he renegotiated the backstop, he just reverted to a previous proposal, border down the Irish sea.

This proposal had EU support but not UK support originally.

This election may trigger Scottish independence.

Northern Ireland unionists have been thrown under a bus by the Tory mothership.

This one has a long way to run and there could be long term destruction of the union.

Or we could see a very soft brexit where nothing really changes.

It wasn't a reversion to a previous proposal. He added the idea of democratic ratification by the Northern Ireland Assembly into it which wasn't on the table beforehand.

This election result is also seismic because the Conservative party is now the party of the working man. Labour have lost this vote and may never get it back.

The Conservative party must now change. It cannot be the party for wealthy people in leafy suburbia and country towns in the home counties. Boris needs to make it a one nation Tory party like what he has said.

He's got a huge majority. Let's see what he does with it. I'm glad that the UK doesn't have another hung paralysed parliament.

One of the first things he should do is also repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act. It was stupid that he wasn't able to call an election for so long because the opposition were chicken.

briany

Northern Irish Unionists have not been thrown under a bus by the Tories. The errant beliefs of a minority of Loyalists has been disregarded, and only right, too. Some sort of compromise has always had a majority of support in NI, be that a backstop or a frontstop. Hopefully the DUP's poor electoral performance in this past general election will be demonstrative that their stance in no way represented the feelings of NI as a whole, and a wake up call to change their ways and become more accommodating in their future political dealings or face further defeat and irrelevance at the polls.

As for those Loyalist men of violence who made threats over any compromise being enacted, what a bunch of w**kers. Exactly as bad as their Republican counterparts.

KWAG2019

theological wrote: »

For me it is pretty straightforward. This conversation is three and a half years out of date.

In 2016 a majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union and chart their own course outside. You may not agree but that's an entirely respectable choice.

In 2017 the British people voted for parties that promised to honour the referendum result. Labour at that time stated they would leave the EU.

In 2019 Labour committed to a second referendum. The British public were fed up of their decision in 2016 not being respected and constantly being told that their decision didn't matter.

On Thursday I voted for the Conservatives. I voted for them for two reasons:

Despite being a remain voter in 2016 I felt that after the referendum the result of the British people should be respected. The mucking around by MPs on this issue was disrespectful to the British public who voted to leave. Get Brexit done struck a chord with me and the British public who are frustrated at the dithering in parliament.

The thought of Jeremy Corbyn being prime minister was terrifying. His far left policies would thrash the British economy. Their campaign became silly towards the end when it was obvious that they were just going to blow a load of cash on giveaways like free broadband and nationalising businesses.

I would say well done Boris. Everyone said he couldn't renegotiate the backstop - he did. Everyone said he wouldn't last as prime minister - he has. And he's got one of the biggest Tory majorities if not the biggest since Thatcher in 1987.

Most of all the UK has a stable government. With 80 MPs in majority Boris will be able to sort the withdrawal bill out and set a clear policy platform which is good for Britain.

A great example of how it works. The lies, the illegality, the threats to politicize the judiciary, the racism, the homophobia, the incompetence, the buffoonery, the warnings from former PMs are irrelevant. Irrelevant. I have no doubt FGers are looking for the same magic bullet.

weldoninhio

MadYaker wrote: »

So you accept that in 2016 the people voted to leave with a deal and that no deal never had sufficient public support?

In 2016 the British people voted to leave. There was absolutely no mention of a deal or no deal on the ballot.

weldoninhio

pjohnson wrote: »

We are significantly smarter.

Banal meaningless slogans didn't get Casey elected but worked for Johnson.

What “banal meaningless slogans” did Casey have??

easypazz

theological wrote: »

It wasn't a reversion to a previous proposal. He added the idea of democratic ratification by the Northern Ireland Assembly into it which wasn't on the table beforehand.

This election result is also seismic because the Conservative party is now the party of the working man. Labour have lost this vote and may never get it back.

The Conservative party must now change. It cannot be the party for wealthy people in leafy suburbia and country towns in the home counties. Boris needs to make it a one nation Tory party like what he has said.

He's got a huge majority. Let's see what he does with it. I'm glad that the UK doesn't have another hung paralysed parliament.

One of the first things he should do is also repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act. It was stupid that he wasn't able to call an election for so long because the opposition were chicken.

Bojo would have voted against his own deal if somebody else had proposed it.

There was really nothing new in it.

end of the road

theological wrote: »

For me it is pretty straightforward. This conversation is three and a half years out of date.

In 2016 a majority of the British people voted to leave the European Union and chart their own course outside. You may not agree but that's an entirely respectable choice.

In 2017 the British people voted for parties that promised to honour the referendum result. Labour at that time stated they would leave the EU.

In 2019 Labour committed to a second referendum. The British public were fed up of their decision in 2016 not being respected and constantly being told that their decision didn't matter.

On Thursday I voted for the Conservatives. I voted for them for two reasons:

Despite being a remain voter in 2016 I felt that after the referendum the result of the British people should be respected. The mucking around by MPs on this issue was disrespectful to the British public who voted to leave. Get Brexit done struck a chord with me and the British public who are frustrated at the dithering in parliament.

The thought of Jeremy Corbyn being prime minister was terrifying. His far left policies would thrash the British economy. Their campaign became silly towards the end when it was obvious that they were just going to blow a load of cash on giveaways like free broadband and nationalising businesses.

I would say well done Boris. Everyone said he couldn't renegotiate the backstop - he did. Everyone said he wouldn't last as prime minister - he has. And he's got one of the biggest Tory majorities if not the biggest since Thatcher in 1987.

Most of all the UK has a stable government. With 80 MPs in majority Boris will be able to sort the withdrawal bill out and set a clear policy platform which is good for Britain.

being terified of corbyn being prime minister is absolutely laughable. the idea that his policies are far left is also laughable but then again that is how ridiculous and polarised politics is in britain now. his policies are mostly centrist to centre left, policies either practiced in most other european countries and in scandinavian countries which seem to have a better quality of life then what exists in britain.
renationalising businesses, some of which are nationalised in every other country, and which in some cases were very very badly privatized in the first place in the uk, is not blowing cash on give aways, but undoing the damage that was done to public services.
yes, everyone said borris couldn't renigotiate the backstop, and they were actually correct, what was wanted was the backstop to be abolished and that a hard border along the border between the ROI and NI would exist. what happened is borris caved, threw the DUP under the bus (credit to him on that in fairness) and put the border down the irish sea. just to note also that he may still not last as prime minister.
the government isn't as stable as it's supporters may think, the divisions in the tory party still remain and they are unlikely to go away.

theological

end of the road wrote: »

being terified of corbyn being prime minister is absolutely laughable. the idea that his policies are far left is also laughable but then again that is how ridiculous and polarised politics is in britain now. his policies are mostly centrist to centre left, policies either practiced in most other european countries and in scandinavian countries which seem to have a better quality of life then what exists in britain.
renationalising businesses, some of which are nationalised in every other country, and which in some cases were very very badly privatized in the first place in the uk, is not blowing cash on give aways, but undoing the damage that was done to public services.
yes, everyone said borris couldn't renigotiate the backstop, and they were actually correct, what was wanted was the backstop to be abolished and that a hard border along the border between the ROI and NI would exist. what happened is borris caved, threw the DUP under the bus (credit to him on that in fairness) and put the border down the irish sea. just to note also that he may still not last as prime minister.
the government isn't as stable as it's supporters may think, the divisions in the tory party still remain and they are unlikely to go away.

And in Scandinavian countries the State takes most of peoples salaries. No thanks. I'd rather let people spend most what they earn with a smaller amount of income tax to generate economic activity. Then take taxes on the goods and services bought and small taxation on the profits of the companies.

The problem with Labour's position is that it is based on either taxing people a heck of a lot more, or borrowing a heck of a lot more money. The Conservative approach and the better approach is to work on growing the economy and then use the proceeds of that to fund public services. That's simply sensible economics.

The idea of buying out billions of pounds of private equity particularly in the area of free broadband was ludicrous. Most people knew that Jeremy Corbyn's giveaways had a price and it was going to have to come from somewhere. Also broadband provision in the UK fares better under a competitive environment in a market economy than a non-competitive one in a state owned monopoly.

end of the road

theological wrote: »

And in Scandinavian countries the State takes most of peoples salaries. No thanks. I'd rather let people spend most what they earn with a smaller amount of income tax to generate economic activity. Then take taxes on the goods and services bought and small taxation on the profits of the companies.

The problem with Labour's position is that it is based on either taxing people a heck of a lot more, or borrowing a heck of a lot more money. The Conservative approach and the better approach is to work on growing the economy and then use the proceeds of that to fund public services. That's simply sensible economics.

The idea of buying out billions of pounds of private equity particularly in the area of free broadband was ludicrous. Most people knew that Jeremy Corbyn's giveaways had a price and it was going to have to come from somewhere. Also broadband provision in the UK fares better under a competitive environment in a market economy than a non-competitive one in a state owned monopoly.

the conservative approach in the uk is to decimate public services and absolutely anything else that a society needs to function.
thousands of police officers gone, a massive crime increase, and that's just in the last 9 years and only a tiny part of things.
public services have to be paid for, the only way that can be done is to either increase tax to pay for it, or borrow on top of just letting the economy grow some bit. simply relying on the economy to grow isn't enough in itself, if it was then that is what every party and country would be doing. even the tories apparently borrow, and lots.
corbyn was just taking back the bare infrastructure, nothing more, creating greater competition where competition would be viable was one of his aims, but he also recognised other services are not viable for competition and haven't and can't deliver it.
everything comes at a price, especially the current approach to doing things in the uk. once again, if you want good public services they have to be paid for, if you want services that are unable to deliver anything, then you can have your low tax economy away, but don't be surprised when the country finally gives way and becomes a basket case.

knipex

end of the road wrote: »

being terified of corbyn being prime minister is absolutely laughable. the idea that his policies are far left is also laughable but then again that is how ridiculous and polarised politics is in britain now.

Its that attitude that got this election result.

end of the road wrote: »

his policies are mostly centrist to centre left, policies either practiced in most other european countries and in scandinavian countries which seem to have a better quality of life then what exists in britain.

If you think Corbyn is center left then the center has moved even more to the left than I thought.

end of the road wrote: »

renationalising businesses, some of which are nationalised in every other country, and which in some cases were very very badly privatized in the first place in the uk, is not blowing cash on give aways, but undoing the damage that was done to public services..

I see how... how stupid was I... Of course he isn't nationalizing business, he is renationalizing.. That's not far left at all...



People don't want hard left policies. They never did. A small group of hard left managed to take over the Labour party and convince themselves that the people did and then insulated and spat on every moderate in the party.

The result wasn't pretty

There is noting more scary than a True believer, convinced they are right and everyone else is wrong. Especially when they are surrounded by an echo chamber.

biko

The vocal minority speaks

https://twitter.com/BreitbartLondon/status/1205850686308700160

biko

Jacket only available in XXXL size

Padre_Pio

Ah Breitbart, that bastion of balanced, unbiased journalism.

One person doesn't represent a whole movement.

biko

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Ah Breitbart, that bastion of balanced, unbiased journalism.

One person doesn't represent a whole movement.

Shooting the messenger eh? Difficulties to see past the logo in the video?

Here, a leftist link to reduce the logo anxiety
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/dec/12/general-election-2019-uk-live-labour-tories-corbyn-boris-johnson-results-exit-poll?page=with:block-5df39e258f08895152f9cb9c

'Not my prime minister': protesters clash with police after Boris Johnson elected

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn_sdhIvpSE

SaintLeibowitz

biko wrote: »

Shooting the messenger eh? Difficulties to see past the logo in the video?

Here, a leftist link to reduce the logo anxiety
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2019/dec/12/general-election-2019-uk-live-labour-tories-corbyn-boris-johnson-results-exit-poll?page=with:block-5df39e258f08895152f9cb9c

'Not my prime minister': protesters clash with police after Boris Johnson elected

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qn_sdhIvpSE

To be fair breitbart is a white nationalist organisation. You'd think you'd pick your 'news' sources better.