ITV Referendum debate

severnside gull · Jun 10, 2016

neilbard said:
Are you feckin crazy!

Perhaps.
But clearly less so than Boris as I have no ambition for power nor do I build arguments based so evidently and entirely on mistruth and misconception and expect to be held in esteem by any rational thinking person. He has cleverly concocted an image as a likeable rogue but is as disingenuous as any politician. He and Gove have made a very transparent bid for power. Deluded? I bloody well hope so.

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

severnside gull said:
nor do I build arguments based so evidently and entirely on mistruth and misconception

Can you be more specific?

pb21 · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
Can you be more specific?

Aren’t Borris and Gove et al going around saying they will save the NHS by pumping in an extra £350 million pounds to it every week, if we leave the EU?

Didnt they say that they will cut VAT on energy bills?

Maybe they are telling the truth, maybe one of dodgy Dave's dead pigs might be resurrected and take to the skies.

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

pb21 said:
Aren’t Borris and Gove et al going around saying they will save the NHS by pumping in an extra £350 million pounds to it every week, if we leave the EU?

Didnt they say that they will cut VAT on energy bills?

Maybe they are telling the truth, maybe one of dodgy Dave's dead pigs might be resurrected and take to the skies.

They said that the EU takes 350M from us a week, and by saving that money we can spend it on our priorities, things like the NHS. That's true to be fair.

They said that in the EU we are not allowed to abolish VAT on fuel, outside the EU we would be able to, that's also true.

I don't see how these things qualify as mistruths or misconceptions?

severnside gull · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
Can you be more specific?

I can be as specific as the leave campaign........

EU net contributions - palpably mis-stated
NHS - underfunded by all UK governments (not the EU) for decades & that won't change under the tories whoever's in
Turkey - about as likely to join the EU in the foreseeable future as IS is to sponsor a Christian Aid day
Immigration - thinking you can lock the borders and fiddle while Rome burns is deluded. Demographic shifts are a global issue requiring global cooperation. If nothing else the channel isn't that wide and the French won't be stopping people for us
Trade - deals that have taken other countries years to negotiate won't drop in our laps automatically. Travelling extensively in Europe I hear everywhere that the popular reaction to brexit will be bitter and aggressive

............key note arguments based on selective mistruth and misconception intentionally targeting the gullible and the xenophobic.

and note that I'm not suggesting the Remain camp are any less disingenuous, just that Johnson and Gove's naked greed for power is (pray God) deluded. :thumbsup:

pb21 · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
They said that the EU takes 350M from us a week, and by saving that money we can spend it on our priorities, things like the NHS. That's true to be fair.

They said that in the EU we are not allowed to abolish VAT on fuel, outside the EU we would be able to, that's also true.

I don't see how these things qualify as mistruths or misconceptions?

Oh right I assumed that by highlighting these things, that's what they want us to think they would do.

They don't say we could buy 14 million dildos at £25 each every week with the savings, because they don't want us to think that's what they would do with the savings, that would be stupid and only a stupid person would believe them if they said it.

When you have Brexiters saying that they aren't going to do those things, spend £350 million extra a week on the NHS, and wont campaign for Brexit on that basis because they don't want to lie and mislead the public, it doesn't take a genius to work out they are mistruths and misconceptions, if you couldn't figure it out yourself from the fact that Gove and Johnson are advocating more public spending on the NHS!

But you carry on voting for Brexit in the hope the NHS will get an extra £350 a week!

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

severnside gull said:
I can be as specific as the leave campaign........

EU net contributions - palpably mis-stated
NHS - underfunded by all UK governments (not the EU) for decades & that won't change under the tories whoever's in
Turkey - about as likely to join the EU in the foreseeable future as IS is to sponsor a Christian Aid day
Immigration - thinking you can lock the borders and fiddle while Rome burns is deluded. Demographic shifts are a global issue requiring global cooperation. If nothing else the channel isn't that wide and the French won't be stopping people for us
Trade - deals that have taken other countries years to negotiate won't drop in our laps automatically. Travelling extensively in Europe I hear everywhere that the popular reaction to brexit will be bitter and aggressive

............key note arguments based on selective mistruth and misconception intentionally targeting the gullible and the xenophobic.

and note that I'm not suggesting the Remain camp are any less disingenuous, just that Johnson and Gove's naked greed for power is deluded. :thumbsup

The EU controls just of 350M of UK taxpayer money per week. The controversy lies in the fact that a) we send 250M and they tell us how we must spend 100M, and the fact that arguably there is some economic benefit to EU membership. But if I took 250 from you every week and told you how you must spend a further 100 every week, I think it would be fair of you to say I take 350 from you a week. It wouldn't be a lie, or misleading really would it.

The NHS is underfunded, it needs resources, and resources are limited. Freeing up resources could help fund the NHS. It's true.

Turkey won't be joining in the near future - but will they be joining? Yes. So which side is being misleading about that?

Nobody is saying lock the borders, just that we should have a right to decide who can move to this country. Is that unreasonable?

Most trade is conducted without any trade deals. The EU has no trade deal with China or Japan, yet there are a lot of products being bought and sold in the EU made in Japan and China. The EU is the slowest region in the world at forming trade deals. It also has trade deals with countries whose GDP totals just over 5 Trillion. But for Switzerland it's close to 30T, Singapore close to 35T, South Korea, 45T, and Chile has deals with access to 50T. None of those countries had to have open borders or EU membership to achieve that.

If Europes reaction to us leaving would be bitter and aggressive then maybe it's not the mutually respectful relationship we should want to be in. If I was in a relationship with someone who threatened to spite me if I leave, well I would think that was probably not a relationship I want to be in. A true friend says that you should do what you feel you want to do, and whatever you chose we will support you and try to make it work.

Blue Valkyrie · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
They said that the EU takes 350M from us a week, and by saving that money we can spend it on our priorities, things like the NHS. That's true to be fair.

They said that in the EU we are not allowed to abolish VAT on fuel, outside the EU we would be able to, that's also true.

I don't see how these things qualify as mistruths or misconceptions?

350M is misleading is it not, because we get a discount ( rebate ) on that which of course is already available to spend ( on the NHS etc ).

It's silly of them. They should just be truthful and give the correct figure as even though it is less it would have the same weight in the argument.

Will anyone really vote differently whether it is 200M? or 350M

But to stick with £350M just invites the criticism that they are lying.

Two Professors · Jun 10, 2016

I obviously meet and talk to a different breed of European than SG.On recent trips in both France and Catalan Spain there has been great interest and support for the referendum,and no hostility whatsoever (apart from the usual French officialdom!).

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

pb21 said:
Oh right I assumed that by highlighting these things, that's what they want us to think they would do.

They don't say we could buy 14 million dildos at £25 each every week with the savings, because they don't want us to think that's what they would do with the savings, that would be stupid and only a stupid person would believe them if they said it.

When you have Brexiters saying that they aren't going to do those things, spend £350 million extra a week on the NHS, and wont campaign for Brexit on that basis because they don't want to lie and mislead the public, it doesn't take a genius to work out they are mistruths and misconceptions, if you couldn't figure it out yourself from the fact that Gove and Johnson are advocating more public spending on the NHS!

But you carry on voting for Brexit in the hope the NHS will get an extra £350 a week!

You seem to be thinking in the very short term. You don't believe that Gove and Boris would spend the money on the NHS. But in reality the money will be back in the hands of the UK government, which means the people and their elected representitives. That means the money will be available to the next Labour government, if you prefer to think of it that way. The idea we should base this decision on how you feel about the current government is a little short sighted, they won't be here for long, the EU will though if we remain.

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

Blue Valkyrie said:
350M is misleading is it not, because we get a discount ( rebate ) on that which of course is already available to spend ( on the NHS etc ).

It's silly of them. They should just be truthful and give the correct figure as even though it is less it would have the same weight in the argument.

Will anyone really vote differently whether it is 200M? or 350M

But to stick with £350M just invites the criticism that they are lying.

Not exactly, because we are told how we must spend the rebate. If I take 250 from you a week, and tell you that you can keep a further 100, but you must spend it how I say, it wouldn't be unreasonable of you to say I am taking 350 a week from you, would it?

Blue Valkyrie · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
Not exactly, because we are told how we must spend the rebate. If I take 250 from you a week, and tell you that you can keep a further 100, but you must spend it how I say, it wouldn't be unreasonable of you to say I am taking 350 a week from you, would it?

What are the specifics of 'what we are told to spend it on' ? I genuinely don't know. It sounds vague and wooly.

If we are 'told to spend' 150M on X, for example on 'roads', surely that is money that we don't have to find from the main budget, and so we can divert the 150M that would have been allocated for 'roads' from the main budget to other areas.

I find the 350M figure as one that is designed to mislead, and as such dishonest.

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

Blue Valkyrie said:
What are the specifics of 'what we are told to spend it on' ? I genuinely don't know. It sounds vague and wooly, what are we 'told to spend it on'.

If we are 'told to spend' 150M on X, for example on 'roads' surely that is money that we don't have to find from the main budget, and so we can divert the 150M that would have been allocated for 'roads' from the main budget to other areas.

Does it matter? It's a principle, and if they tell us to spend it on good things we were already going to spend it on today, who can say what they will decide we must spend it on tomorrow?

Besides, the question at hand is, is the 350M figure a lie? Well I just explained that we send 250M, and they let us keep a further 100M (i.e. does not get sent) and tell us how we must spend it. So you tell me, is the 350M figure a lie? To me, the accusations about it being a lie is actually misleading, it's like a "gotcha" point. Saying, "look see we don't send it", when this issue is really about who controls it, not whether it gets actually transferred over or not. But you tell me. Is the 350M figure the lie that remain say it is? or is it reasonable of leave to say that the EU controls 350M a week of our money?

Blue Valkyrie · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
Does it matter? It's a principle, and if they tell us to spend it on good things we were already going to spend it on today, who can say what they will decide we must spend it on tomorrow?

Besides, the question at hand is, is the 350M figure a lie? Well I just explained that we send 250M, and they let us keep a further 100M (i.e. does not get sent) and tell us how we must spend it. So you tell me, is the 350M figure a lie? To me, the accusations about it being a lie is actually misleading, it's like a "gotcha" point. Saying, "look see we don't send it", when this issue is really about who controls it, not whether it gets actually transferred over or not. But you tell me. Is the 350M figure the lie that remain say it is? or is it reasonable of leave to say that the EU controls 350M a week of our money?

I think the 350M figure is misleading and as such dishonest.

And as said before it's a silly dishonesty that serves no purpose. 200M would win as many votes as 350M, so why not play fair ?

severnside gull · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
They said that the EU takes 350M from us a week, and by saving that money we can spend it on our priorities, things like the NHS. That's true to be fair.

They said that in the EU we are not allowed to abolish VAT on fuel, outside the EU we would be able to, that's also true.

I don't see how these things qualify as mistruths or misconceptions?

Except It isn't "true to be fair" that we give £350m a week to the EU. We actually get 30% rebate negotiated by Thatcher and almost another third gets reinvested in the UK via regional funding for poorer areas (northeast, Cornwall etc) inadequately supported by UK government. The net figure of under £150m is still a lot of money but if you are pinning your hopes on a free and fully funded NHS on that level of accuracy regarding available investment it's time to worry.
The £350m per week headline is, being most generous, a mistruth.

As for VAT - it is one (relatively small at 20-25p per litre where production costs are around 30p) component of government fuel taxes as Gove & Co will hopefully be aware (if not then someone needs to tell them as they are after all in government now and responsible for these things). That is why I paid 95.7 CENTS per litre for diesel this week in the EU. The most I've paid recently was 119.9 cents - massively lower than the UK under the same rules.
So at best deliberately misleading.

Just two examples of being "brexited"

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

Blue Valkyrie said:
I think the 350M is misleading and as such dishonest.

So if I take 250 from you a week, and I tell you how you can spend a further 100 a week, you would say I take 250 a week from you, not 350 a week? & If you did say that I took 350 a week from you, you would be lying?

I think the dishonesty is calling the 350M figure a lie, to be honest.

Blue Valkyrie · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
So if I take 250 from you a week, and I tell you how you can spend a further 100 a week, you would say I take 250 a week from you, not 350 a week? & If you did say that I took 350 a week from you, you would be lying?

I think the dishonesty is calling the 350M figure a lie, to be honest.

As I said it is a misleading figure, and is as such dishonest.

A silly and unecessary dishonesty.

dingodan · Jun 10, 2016

severnside gull said:
Except It isn't "true to be fair" that we give £350m a week to the EU. We actually get 30% rebate negotiated by Thatcher and almost another third gets reinvested in the UK via regional funding for poorer areas (northeast, Cornwall etc) inadequately supported by UK government. The net figure of under £150m is still a lot of money but if you are pinning your hopes on a free and fully funded NHS on that level of accuracy regarding available investment it's time to worry. the £350m per week headline is, being most generous, a mistruth.

As for VAT - it is one (relatively small) component of government fuel taxes as Gove & Co will hopefully be aware (if not then someone needs to tell them as they are after all in government now and responsible for these things). I paid 95.7 CENTS per litre for diesel this week in the EU. The most I've paid recently was 119.9 cents - massively lower than the UK under the same rules.
So at best deliberately misleading.

Just two examples of being "brexited"

You don't see a need or a want to lower VAT on fuel, fair enough (although fuel poverty in the UK is a real issue).

One day in the future, if circumstances change, you might want to lower VAT on fuel. Should you (we) have that right, if circumstances demand it and it's what the population want? Shouldn't we be in charge of our own affairs?

It's not about funding the NHS for me personally, it's about it being spent on whatever the public want it to be, they can elect whichever government they choose, I just believe that they should be able to elect a government which makes these decisions, rather than having to elect a government which will have to shrug it's shoulders and say sorry we don't have control over your tax money.

pb21 · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
You seem to be thinking in the very short term. You don't believe that Gove and Boris would spend the money on the NHS. But in reality the money will be back in the hands of the UK government, which means the people and their elected representitives. That means the money will be available to the next Labour government, if you prefer to think of it that way. The idea we should base this decision on how you feel about the current government is a little short sighted, they won't be here for long, the EU will though if we remain.

I am thinking in the terms that Gove and Borris are suggesting, that by leaving the EU we will spend an extra £350 million pounds a week on the NHS.

That will never happen, even if its is technically possible (as would spending it on 14 million 10'' dildos a week). To suggest it will happen is a mistruth, to suggest it could happen is a misconception.

Thats why we see people previously campaigning for Brexit now refusing to do so; it is misleading and dishonest.

severnside gull · Jun 10, 2016

dingodan said:
So if I take 250 from you a week, and I tell you how you can spend a further 100 a week, you would say I take 250 a week from you, not 350 a week? & If you did say that I took 350 a week from you, you would be lying?

I think the dishonesty is calling the 350M figure a lie, to be honest.

To be honest. If you take 250 (not 350) then spend another 100 on me on top, I'd say that quoting 350 in the first place showed a flagrant disregard for the truth :lolol:

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

ITV Referendum debate

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Not seen such Bravery!

Two Mad Professors

New member

New member

Not seen such Bravery!

New member

Not seen such Bravery!

Well-known member

New member

Not seen such Bravery!

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Share this page