Lincoln Imp
Well-known member
- Feb 2, 2009
- 5,964
I would go with your definition in post 318, although I wouldn't describe it as half leaving. If we're not members we've left, surely?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
I would go with your definition in post 318, although I wouldn't describe it as half leaving. If we're not members we've left, surely?
Sort of the difference between Pampers and Izal I fear,
Seagull58
In the Algarve
A militant socialist workers circle jerk
Seagull58
In the Algarve
The "analysts" were forecasting Oil to reach $200 a barrel not many years ago. Now it's at less than $50.
alfredmizen
Banned
- Mar 11, 2015
- 6,342
He chose to move to and gain citizenship of a country that wouldn't accept the terms he's telling us that we should accept , your above arguments are meaningless and bear no similarity to what he has done i.e. Leave his original residence for somewhere new , then start lecturing those left behind how they should live their lives, , his stance is a typical labour on of "do as I say , not as I do " .
alfredmizen
Banned
- Mar 11, 2015
- 6,342
You have to ask what was the point of voting to leave in the first place if we accept what you think would be soft brexit ?As far as I can tell soft Brexit means trying to retain our current membership of/access to the single market, which almost certainly means free movement continuing and having to abide by ECJ law (only half/ not really leaving?). Whereas Hard or real Brexit means negotiating for a maximum amount of tariff free access to the single market possible while ending free movement and primacy of EU law amongst other issues, broadly defined as 'taking back control'.
Others will probably define it differently which supports pastafarian's point .. all rather subjective.
Lincoln Imp
Well-known member
- Feb 2, 2009
- 5,964
Because if we left under soft Brexit terms we would still have left. We would no longer be members. Brexit would have meant Brexit. Now it might not be the sort of Brexit you had in mind but you can't start adjusting the definition after the vote.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,892
The problem is that the working poor, those who even Mrs May says " have been left behind ", will suffer proportionally more in the long run from the current slide in the value of the Pound... But hey ho,
studio150
Well-known member
Maybe the following article better articulates what [MENTION=11720]kevo[/MENTION] was looking to get across, no doubt he will shout if not.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/07/marching-mad-brexit-someone-speak-48-per-cent
drew
Drew
So, of the 37% of those that voted leave, what percentage voted for a hard brexit and what percentage for a soft brexit? Fact is nobody knows because the brexit campaign didn't campaign on either basis.
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,635
I am not an economist so this is not a loaded question; why will they suffer disproportionately?
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
Ah you mean a theoretical Brexit, in name only. I think we know that was never going to happen. If May went for that option the Tory party would implode and the vast majority of Leave voters would be a a tad miffed. The PM has correctly identified the main areas/bare minimum she has to deliver on. She's talking the talk we will wait to see if those kitten heels can walk the walk.
Quite, which is why it (my definition of soft Brexit) is just wishful thinking for some remainers and won't happen as it would be rightly viewed as a grubby attempt to water down or circumvent the referendum vote.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,300
they dont unless inflation starts to increase. they have the least exposure to currency as their main expenditure is rent, energy and food, which fluctuate little with currency. those frequently buying consumer goods from abroad will be affected the most.
Yes it is. It's not possible to be give fine detail on what everyone wants, but we can safely say that the majority of people who voted would like us to still have access to the single market.
Access to single market, free movement of people.
Nobody knows the exact percentage, but it only needs to be 10% soft, 90% hard for the majority of voters to be in favour of soft brexit.
Yes, he might have meant to say that, but his point about 'hard brexit' got lost in the idea that 37% shouldn't determine our future. Of course they should, if that's the majority of voters. But I do agree with the point that although we have to leave (as per the result) it doesn't have to be a hard exit.
Yes. That's absolutely clear. All talk of exiting the single market is going against the wishes of the majority.
I voted leave but I did so on the understanding that we would still have access to the EU single market (as written in the Tory manifesto), many thousands would have done the same.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,300
that isnt a given, it depends on the cost of "access". if it means paying in, accepting EU law and regulations, free movement, in other words EU-lite, then i dont the majority of leavers would support that. people are expecting powers returned, less money paid, less immigration, they need to deliver on at least two of the three i'd say.
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
All the EU's trading partners across the world have 'access' to the single market as would we even in a Hard Brexit scenario. It's all about what type of access. Do you mean exactly the same as we have now?
The majority of leavers might not like that, but the majority of voters would, and that's the point.