Brexit

[Barrykearley]

Get signing this one chaps

 

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/168882

[Steve V8]

2 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

Get signing this one chaps

 

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/168882

Signed sealed delivered, along with a FB share and a nice little rant about naysayers and doom mongers.!!! 

[theelanman]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37857785

 

don't we look like a bunch of soddin amateurs

[Kimbers]

Was just going to post that up. It is really dangerous going against a democratic referendum, and I don't mean in legal purposes. If the MP's try and over turn the vote then I can see some mass rioting and demonstration!

[theelanman]

what happened to the voice of the public?........

the vote said leave.....

it didn't say go to court.....over rule it then let the politicians decide

what was the point of it all then?......

annoyed doesn't cover it........we just look like a bunch of idiots and while we're messing about the rest of the world are taking the mick financially and we're getting a right royal rodgering........

the naysayers by fighting it are making it worse as its being dragged out, costing money, and costing the country its moral and financial standing

[Chillidoggy]

Unbelievable. There'll be trouble at t'mill, you mark my words.

Meanwhile, In spotted this:-

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Five-Brexit-Island-Blyton-Grown/dp/178648384X

 

[Andyww]

All the delaying tactics bring us closer to the German and French elections, in which the EU is going to get a right drubbing, and another Greek bailout, and possible collapse of the Itailian economy and some predict Euro collapse. So no bad thing.

[basalte]

On ‎28‎/‎06‎/‎2016 at 14:23, basalte said:

Interesting to see so many here hacked off with BBC bias against Leave campaigners. You may be surprised in this particular instance to learn that I unreservedly agree with you. 

The key concept here providing a fertile ground for that bias  is "the establishment" composition of media jobs: comprising Public School usually Oxbridge-educated "born to rule" classes. (For example, BBC Broadcasters David and Jonathan Dimbleby , the 2 sons of BBC Broadcaster Richard Dimbleby. BBC Broadcaster Dan Snow , the son of BBC Broadcaster Peter Snow, and so on). They instinctively recoil at anyone who expresses a view threatening to their belief system and instinctive elitism .  For example (I like to give examples), BBC Chief Political Correspondent Laura Kuenssberg`s brother is a senior civil servant in the Department for Communities and Local Government and her sister is UK High Commissioner to Mozambique . Hey they are soooo down with the struggling workers! They are easy targets for right-wing populists of course but I am shooting from the Left and think the BBC is just as biased towards the Right - Public School Oxbridge educated Cameron`s "In" Campaign.      

In like manner I have noted  BBC bias against Jeremy Corbyn -(the only anti-establishment candidate in the campaign who truthfully said that he was 7.5 out of ten in favour of the EU) . During the last local elections the overall vote share :  Tory 30 %.  Corbyn`s Labour  : 31% . I swear to you that I looked in vain on the BBC election results  for any mention of that share .

Yesterday the Blairite plotters who moved against JC showed contempt for the hundreds of thousands of ordinary Labour members who voted for JC as leader.  (trying to protect their old pal Blair against Chilcot by subbing someone who won`t cause trouble by asking if he`s now a War Criminal).   

That idea of "contempt for the public"-I think that it may be ringing some bells with you ?

Anyway a "new referendum" idea is another aspect of that Establishment contempt and I'm agree it looks pretty silly.

What is a more genuine "threat" to our leaving the EU is that it HAS NEVER BEEN OUR DECISION TO MAKE to take GB out of the EU. The legal constitutional position is absolutely clear.  If you voted Leave it will be our MPs who have the power to take Britain out of the EU. They will have to vote to repeal the Act OF 1972 taking us in . Parliament will be put to the vote probably after a new Tory leader has been elected.

Of course you may feel very angry at that state of affairs but there it is.

As far as I am aware a majority of MPs want us to stay in the EU. It is THEIR decision to leave or stay, not ours.

My contentious view is that Bo Jo never wanted us to leave the EU (for examples see his pronouncements previous to the referendum) and is deeply troubled by the poisoned chalice that Cameron has inadvertently dumped in his lap.

Expect Boris to huff and puff about Trafalgar, the Battle of Britain etc etc but there will be multifarious manoeuvring prior to Parliament`s vote either to gain a vote that will keep us in the EU against your wishes  or a minimal terms of Brexit that may be hammered out to give the maximum impression of action but will be a quasi - stay in the EU. 

Nothing `s ever simple......   

 

       

Hello again, PARAS 7-9 ABOVE. Funny how things turn out, who would have thought that so many campaigners for the restoration of British Parliamentary Sovereignty would be so outraged by errr...

-the restoration of British Parliamentary Sovereignty !

[Andyww]

Having thought about this some more and seeing some of the discussions its quite clear we are not going anywhere.

It was inevitable I suppose all along that the powers that be would find a way to prevent the referendum result sticking. They did everything they could to get the result they wanted but failed, so they are implementing plan B which is to legally require an act of parliament and then get it thrown out by the House of Lords.

 

 

[100th_Idiot]

24 minutes ago, Andyww said:

Having thought about this some more and seeing some of the discussions its quite clear we are not going anywhere.

It was inevitable I suppose all along that the powers that be would find a way to prevent the referendum result sticking. They did everything they could to get the result they wanted but failed, so they are implementing plan B which is to legally require an act of parliament and then get it thrown out by the House of Lords.

 

 

I don't read it as they are legally requiring and act of parliament but that and act of parliament was always legally required and the courts are upholding the sovereignty of parliament according to the laws of the UK.

Looks like a right old clusterfuck.

The question now is whether MPs will move against the result of the referendum of not.

Interesting times.

Of course this ruling will be appealed to the supreme court and if that also goes against Brexit then perhaps they could appeal to the ECJ.

[Chillidoggy]

"if that also goes against Brexit then perhaps they could appeal to the ECJ."

 

 

 

[Mark Blanchard]

Watch out for possible corruption too as rich Business Leaders that voted remain pay off PMs to swing the vote in their favour.  

[100th_Idiot]

11 minutes ago, Mark Blanchard said:

Watch out for possible corruption too as rich Business Leaders that voted remain pay off PMs to swing the vote in their favour.  

Or the other way around.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3659328/Brexit-buccaneer-rakes-220million-Hedge-fund-tycoon-declares-winner-betting-stock-value-falling.html

[Iconic Ride]

8 hours ago, Kimbers said:

If the MP's try and over turn the vote then I can see some mass rioting and demonstration!

So who's got the bigger pitchforks, the 48% or the 52%?  My money's on the rural farmers.

6 hours ago, basalte said:

As far as I am aware a majority of MPs want us to stay in the EU. It is THEIR decision to leave or stay, not ours.

If that's a constitutional fact (as stated in the full post), I see this being fully resolved in roughly an early 3rd millennium time frame.

6 hours ago, basalte said:

Nothing `s ever simple......   

Amen.

4 hours ago, 100th_Idiot said:

Looks like a right old clusterfuck.

Indeed.

[Barrykearley]

10 hours ago, Kimbers said:

Was just going to post that up. It is really dangerous going against a democratic referendum, and I don't mean in legal purposes. If the MP's try and over turn the vote then I can see some mass rioting and demonstration!

With all this rollocks going on how long going on how long will it be until we challenge the election results..... this is getting bloody stupid now.

roll on the revolution - throw all these champagne troffing salmon guzzling fat pigs to the lions 

[j2 lot]

My money would be on a general election early in 2017. ?

[Kimbers]

If thats the case the UKIP will be the next majority party the way the feeling is in the country right now!

[100th_Idiot]

Unfortunately I agree that if MPs reject the referendum result then UKIP will likely benefit despite their determination to self destruct.  However I think that is very unlikely as the MPs know that not respecting the result will be very dangerous. 

I do think the government may be making a mistake if they appeal to the supreme Court.  This body can make laws where there is a gap and also set precedent. For them to set the precedent that the government can overrule parliament would be a dangerous precedent to set and one I think they are unlikely to make lightly. The government may be better served avoiding a second bloody nose and getting on with parliamentary alignment. 

In the remote chance that parliament rejects A50 then a general election will be called. 

Lastly if MPs approve A50 trigger but the Lords try to reject it there will be a titanic response. 

[Chillidoggy]

5 hours ago, 100th_Idiot said:

 

Lastly if MPs approve A50 trigger but the Lords try to reject it there will be a titanic response. 

 

You are Boris Johnson, and I claim my £10.

Or €11.26.

[Andyww]

18 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

With all this rollocks going on how long going on how long will it be until we challenge the election results..... this is getting bloody stupid now.

roll on the revolution - throw all these champagne troffing salmon guzzling fat pigs to the lions 

Already happens constantly in the Guardian. Apparently the Tories didnt win the election at all, because they only got 36% of the vote so more people didnt vote for them than did. 

[Chillidoggy]

2 hours ago, Andyww said:

Already happens constantly in the Guardian. Apparently the Tories didnt win the election at all, because they only got 36% of the vote so more people didnt vote for them than did. 

 

I blame the hipsters.

[molemot]

To all the Brexiteers who keep chanting, "The people have spoken, the people have spoken..."

This is like 10 people living in a house. They hold a vote on whether to burn the house down because they don't like the colour of the curtains.

Four people vote to burn the house down.

Three people vote not to.

Three of the four people start sprinkling petrol around while chanting," The people have spoken, the people have spoken...."

The fourth says, "I didn't realise you really meant to burn the house down.... I've changed my mind!"

The three people who didn't vote say, "We thought you were kidding! You were serious? Are you insane?!!"

The three arsonists continue their inane and inaccurate chant: "The people have spoken, the people have spoken....."

 

It's an interesting simile....(!) This sort of stuff has consequences.....the difference between this and an election, is that you get a chance to sort things out later with elections....

[Barrykearley]

« The Ultimate TSA Takedown

How Many Bureaucrats Does It Take to Screw in a Light Bulb? »

The Tax System Explained in Beer

===============================================

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…

• The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing
• The fifth would pay $1
• The sixth would pay $3
• The seventh would pay $7
• The eighth would pay $12
• The ninth would pay $18
• The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59

So, that’s what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

“Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20″. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

The bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

• And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
• The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
• The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
• The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
• The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
• The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

“I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,”but he got $10!”

“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”

“That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!”

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

[C8RKH]

2 hours ago, molemot said:

To all the Brexiteers who keep chanting, "The people have spoken, the people have spoken..."

This is like 10 people living in a house. They hold a vote on whether to burn the house down because they don't like the colour of the curtains.

Four people vote to burn the house down.

Three people vote not to.

Three of the four people start sprinkling petrol around while chanting," The people have spoken, the people have spoken...."

The fourth says, "I didn't realise you really meant to burn the house down.... I've changed my mind!"

The three people who didn't vote say, "We thought you were kidding! You were serious? Are you insane?!!"

The three arsonists continue their inane and inaccurate chant: "The people have spoken, the people have spoken....."

 

It's an interesting simile....(!) This sort of stuff has consequences.....the difference between this and an election, is that you get a chance to sort things out later with elections....

Sorry but what a complete load of shite, pish and bollocks. Next we'll be saying that unless a court verdict is a unaminous verdict of 12 good and true men then the verdict does not count.

Your whole analogy makes the presumption that "burning down the house" can only be a bad thing. We currently have the fastest growing economy in the G7. The value of our exports to the EU have been falling every year for the past 10 years, whilst our imports from them have been growing. If we don't trade, who loses out? 

Only this week the BoE revised it's forecast for growth in 17/18 upwards. Contrast that with the continual decline that is happening, and forecasted, for the Eurozone economy.

What real and physical  data informs you that Brexit is bad and comparable with burning down the house? What real data as opposed to the mythical doom and gloom projections from just about everyone? ,

Even the hugely biaised IMF have had to swallow hard on and admit they were wrong?

Let's see how smug and arrogant remainers are after next years elections in France and Germany.  It's going to be an interesting 12-18 months Brexit or not. The lunatics have escaped and just maybe they may not be rounded up and put back into the Asylum. But maybe that is no bad thing.

Of course decisions have consequences. Do you take us all for freakin' clueless numpties? And by not voting the 3 in your example forfeit their right to complain either way. It was their choice not to vote after all.

I have no issue with Parliament wanting a say. What I really take exception too is the frankly total under mining of the negotiation position - it is such a niaive position. You NEVER EVER declare to the other party your key conditions / bargaining points up front. Forget about whether you voted leave or remain, it is sheer lunacy to suggest, a la Corbyn and the others, that the Government MUST declare it's key positions up front. FFS, in what circumstances has that ever been a successful  negotiation strategy?

Also, there is such a complete lack of appreciation of the reality of the situation. We don't invoke A50 to then have a cosy chat to agree the terms then decide whether we like them or not. Once we evoke A50 there is no provision to un-revoke it. We either negotiate a settlement within 2 years or we go without one. End of. Also, we don't have to take the full 2 years. We could just decide after 2 days to end negotiations, say we will never agree and walk out. If we invoke A50 on March 31st we could be out on 2nd April! We would not have common market access but we would default to WTO tariifs. And as per above, as we import more than we export to, the EU, who has the most to lose?

I really wish people would wake up and smell the roses. The decision to leave is FINAL once we invoke it whether or not we get the deal we want. And we CANNOT UNREVOKE it if we don't like the deal on the table. These are facts - noy merely suggestions/soundbites etc.  Gety real and understand the situation. Once we go for it, we've gone...

In a democratic process, the majority, by however small the margin, voted out.

To all the Remainers who keep chanting, "The people have spoken, the people have spoken" and we don't accept it - get over it. In this democracy the majority wins. Stop trying to over turn it and usurp it. Just accept it. Stop behaving like spoilt entitled brats. Move on. And help us all, as one united nation, make it work...

[Barrykearley]

Let's f@ck off now and take wto deals.

stick your eu pishe straight where the sun don't shine. You can't fly like an eagle when your surrounded by turkeys.

goodbye eu - good riddance - hello bright and glorious new world