Grendel
Well-Known Member
Which could all have been challenged at the time - and probably by the leader of the opposition
I think he went on holiday didn’t he?
Hence why I said at best it was a mistruth.
The other side did make comments against it. Even independent fact finders and journalists questioned them on it numerous times stating how the figure was grossly misleading as it didn't include the rebate or money we got back. There is the famous clip of Alexander being probed on the claim by a journalist ON THE BUS.
Personally I think the first sentence on that bus was grossly and intentionally misleading. The second about spending the money on the NHS was what was a lie, because you couldn't spend £350m a week on the NHS without finding the best part of an extra £100m from somewhere else.
Which could all have been challenged at the time - and probably by the leader of the opposition
I think he went on holiday didn’t he?
The bus said one thing and the official manifesto said another. Problem is your average leave voter read the bus not the manifesto. I can also claim this with absolute confidence too as I’m yet to meet a leaver who’s insisting that we join EFTA like the leave manifesto said we would. In fact if you suggested such a thing you would be met with a wall of that’s not what we voted for, we know what we voted for.Hence why I said at best it was a mistruth.
The other side did make comments against it. Even independent fact finders and journalists questioned them on it numerous times stating how the figure was grossly misleading as it didn't include the rebate or money we got back. There is the famous clip of Alexander being probed on the claim by a journalist ON THE BUS.
Personally I think the first sentence on that bus was grossly and intentionally misleading. The second about spending the money on the NHS was what was a lie, because you couldn't spend £350m a week on the NHS without finding the best part of an extra £100m from somewhere else.
I disagree. Again, you're reducing it to a binary. Leaving with no deal, would be a catastrophe, Johnson's deal is near that. Even May's deal not good at all... and it's always missed, of course, that both of these deals don't protect against economic and social armageddon, they just kick the can down the road for the same arguments to be made with a different goal at the end of it.
What we have to do, is do what's 'best'. If that ends up leaving with no deal then so be it, but *all* options (including no deal and remain) have to be on the table in debate to make it 'fair', as all compromises such as EEA still end up as divisive as the extreme ends!
It needs an adult conversation about what's actually 'best'. it needs, dare I say it, experts rather than politicians to be consulted, it needs proper reports and conclusions unfiltered by the political whim of the Prime Minister, leader of the opposition, or Scotland's largest party, let alone a bunch of nutcases from NI. It needs consequences, benefits, and ramifications of *all* options to be considered.
If politicians actually did that (ha!) we wouldn't need any more referenda (is that the plural? referendi?).
People with the relevant skills can make a far more informed prediction than you or I. The reduction of experts to nothing is one of the saddest states of affairs of modern Britain.No one can say what’s best as no one can predict the future
People with the relevant skills can make a far more informed prediction than you or I. The reduction of experts to nothing is one of the saddest states of affairs of modern Britain.
Show me the duck born with more than two heads, show me the horse with less than four legs.Show me any forecast on the Eu in 1974 that showed it is as is now
Show me any economic forecast from two years ago which predicted Germany would now be in recession
also its not just economics or no one in Scotland would want independence wiykd they?
Show me the duck born with more than two heads, show me the horse with less than four legs.
Experts are right far more often than non experts who plug random emotive thoughts into their head rather than objective reason.
(And FWIW a Rugby Advertiser article right after the referendum painted a picture of a far more federalist Europe than it is now. That's the only evidence I have as I no longer have access to others and, frankly, I can't be arsed to (re)find it when the only response I'd get is remoaner you lost, get over it).
For a man with cutting insults that's the most cutting of them all!You sound as childish as Dom
It really shows it's all politics. Ultimately, that's a pretty meaningless vote as it stands!Well whatever else happens Johnson has dragged the initial vote to leave over the line
It really shows it's all politics. Ultimately, that's a pretty meaningless vote as it stands!
Anyone else wish we hadn't bothered with any of this? What do we actually have to gain?
I disagree. Again, you're reducing it to a binary. Leaving with no deal, would be a catastrophe, Johnson's deal is near that. Even May's deal not good at all... and it's always missed, of course, that both of these deals don't protect against economic and social armageddon, they just kick the can down the road for the same arguments to be made with a different goal at the end of it.
What we have to do, is do what's 'best'. If that ends up leaving with no deal then so be it, but *all* options (including no deal and remain) have to be on the table in debate to make it 'fair', as all compromises such as EEA still end up as divisive as the extreme ends!
It needs an adult conversation about what's actually 'best'. it needs, dare I say it, experts rather than politicians to be consulted, it needs proper reports and conclusions unfiltered by the political whim of the Prime Minister, leader of the opposition, or Scotland's largest party, let alone a bunch of nutcases from NI. It needs consequences, benefits, and ramifications of *all* options to be considered.
If politicians actually did that (ha!) we wouldn't need any more referenda (is that the plural? referendi?).
What do we actually have to gain?
That's the million dollar question no one can answer.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
There are leading Brexiters who have stated they’d rather Remain than have CU/No Deal. Are they not Leavey enough now?
Can't imagine why it's pointless doing actual debate with words and all when there's quality stuff like this.Hahaha. There is no second referendum, unless you're referring to 2016, in which case if there was no leave on the paper the choices would be remain.....or remain. Even then some of you would have cause to moan about that. Sorry bunch of increasingly bitter losers. How on earth are you all going to cope with the collossal economic depression that ensues after we leave, because that's what you all seem to want ? Stick around on here moaning all day long or get on with life ?
Can't imagine why it's pointless doing actual debate with words and all when there's quality stuff like this.
I asked this about ooh, 600 pages ago or so, and all I got was that Dutch bloke having no need for mobile phone roaming and that his landline rental cost had gone up. I'd dig it out but I've got toenails that need clipping.Can't tell you mate. I've asked several times and not had an answer.
Can't tell you mate. I've asked several times and not had an answer.
I wasn’t going to get into this all (again) but couldn’t stay silent. Firstly, I sometimes wish I hadn’t bothered...the continued delay has damaged the country more than necessary. If I’d have known what a mess the MPs would make of it, I may well have voted the other way.
In terms of gains, it depends on your point of view:
Not paying an increasing sum into the EU pot ever year...think it’s €15bn, net £9bn...it will increase next year (a significant proportion of which, ballpark a third, 60-70bn goes in farmer subsidies)
Stepping away now rather than in a few years as it will only ever become a closer political union. Why do we need a closer political union ? Why do we need an EU parliament ? Trade, I understand, close relationships, yes, but MEPs and EU parliament...I’ve never quite got.
A semblance of control of our borders. As I’ve stated before, this is not anti immigration (we need net migration due to skills shortages and ageing population) but controlling the numbers coming in better to ensure our infrastructure is maintained at the same rate/is adequate. Also ensuring that people coming to work here are beneficial to the country/what we need. Nobody has ever been able to answer the question as to why a low skilled/low pay worker (from the EU) should be able to come to the UK no questions asked and yet skilled workers from places such as Australia, Africa, American, Asia should go through a proper visa process and may be rejected.
I appreciate that many on here will disagree with some or all of the above but these (and probably other issues) are genuine reasons and/concerns.
ps I’m fully aware of the benefits of remaining in the EU but that wasn’t the question. It’s up to the individual to weigh up the pro’s and cons themselves.
Your style of contribution is very easy to emulate.Can't imagine why it's pointless doing actual debate with words and all when there's quality stuff like this.
I wasn’t going to get into this all (again) but couldn’t stay silent. Firstly, I sometimes wish I hadn’t bothered...the continued delay has damaged the country more than necessary. If I’d have known what a mess the MPs would make of it, I may well have voted the other way.
In terms of gains, it depends on your point of view:
Not paying an increasing sum into the EU pot ever year...think it’s €15bn, net £9bn...it will increase next year (a significant proportion of which, ballpark a third, 60-70bn goes in farmer subsidies)
Stepping away now rather than in a few years as it will only ever become a closer political union. Why do we need a closer political union ? Why do we need an EU parliament ? Trade, I understand, close relationships, yes, but MEPs and EU parliament...I’ve never quite got.
A semblance of control of our borders. As I’ve stated before, this is not anti immigration (we need net migration due to skills shortages and ageing population) but controlling the numbers coming in better to ensure our infrastructure is maintained at the same rate/is adequate. Also ensuring that people coming to work here are beneficial to the country/what we need. Nobody has ever been able to answer the question as to why a low skilled/low pay worker (from the EU) should be able to come to the UK no questions asked and yet skilled workers from places such as Australia, Africa, American, Asia should go through a proper visa process and may be rejected.
I appreciate that many on here will disagree with some or all of the above but these (and probably other issues) are genuine reasons and/or concerns.
ps I’m fully aware of the benefits of remaining in the EU but that wasn’t the question. It’s up to the individual to weigh up the pro’s and cons themselves.
Those points have been answered many pages back in this thread in more detail but to briefly summarise yes we will save the 9 billion payment (and nice to see someone quoting the correct figure for once rather than silly figures like 35 billion), but how much does the economy take in a hit operating under WTO and for how long.
As for immigration, immigration from outside the EU is still rising and one of the countries we've earmarked for a free trade agreement, India, have already said that a condition of any FTA will be a relaxation of visa requirements for its 1.3 billion citizens.
Steve, we were always committed to paying into the pot, the EU works in 7 year programmes so no matter what we'd committed to it as we've drawn down European Funding from this programme.
As for the need for a European parliament, with 28 members and multilateral treaties its necessary to balance the interests of all. Not ideal of course but probably better than being sat in the wilderness a slave to the wants of powerful federal blocs.
Empty heads make the most noise. Young people seeking a sense of purpose that find one are going to make a lot of noise too - they get quite excitable.Have a look at a Brexit Party rally, it’s like god’s waiting room. Then compare that to a people’s vote rally, mainly but not exclusively under 40’s.
Leave is doomed for failure whatever happens because ultimately we’ll rejoin.
He bangs on about the age of those who voted remain against those who voted out. He has nothing to offer except this sad irrelevance. Sounds like a spoilt child.Empty heads make the most noise. Young people seeking a sense of purpose that find one are going to make a lot of noise too - they get quite excitable.
The youngsters at said vote rally are not necessarily representative of youth at large. Just like those carry knives & those that get pissed every Friday night aren't!
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Or just your childish interpretation of his strategy?I’d just like to take this opportunity to point out that Boris is in fact a grown man, our PM and currently presiding over one of the most important processes in living memory.
PM to pull Brexit bill if timetable not approved
If you don’t let me win I’m going to take my ball back. What an absolute child.
So you would agree that Catalans should have their independence? How about Cornwall? London? Coventry? Bedworth?It’s fair enough if they both want it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?