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

Register Log in

[Politics] Brexit

If there was a second Brexit referendum how would you vote?

  • Total voters
    1,081


WATFORD zero

WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 10, 2003
25,802
larus said:
I've virtually stopped posting on here due to the level of personal abuse and blinkered posts. However, I view you usually fair and polite. So, here's my reply to your post.

In regards to Brexit - I (like most Brexit supporters) accept that there will be some disruption when we leave. Of course, over time this will mitigate. The 'Project Fear' being espoused by those who wish to have another referendum won't work. The EU have already admitted that there won't be a hard border in Ireland and they are working on contingency plans to ensure that security, aviation, etc., still function properly. I believe that after things settle down after Brexit, this will allow the UK economy to grow at a faster rate and to focus on future industries such as AI, robotics., space exploration. We are already a leader in some of these new emerging technologies, so I do not fear the future post Brexit.

Next to climate change. Everyone accepts that there was warming towards the end of the 20th century and that CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased. However, all predictions of temperature change based on the 'models' have consistently been wrong and overstated the rate of change. The science is far from settled and the constant scare stores we hear about the impacts of a slightly warming world have been wrong. Such as more hurricanes, tornado's, lack of snow, etc.

Just because someone questions the cause of climate change does not make them a 'flat-earther' or conspiracy theory nut-job. Science is constantly evolving and our understanding is improving.

For example, the big bang theory and dark matter/dark energy. At the end of the 20th century it was widely accepted that the universe was about 13.6bln years old, and expansion was still on-going as observed by red-shift of light. However, new calculations throw this into doubt as the observed mass of the universe only makes up 5% of the mass/energy required. Yes, the total of all of the galaxies etc is only 5% of the mass which the theories need. The rest is dark matter/energy which we can't detect. So, 95% of the universe we are saying we can't detect if.

From wikipedia:


The primary evidence for dark matter is that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating, or would not have formed or move as they do, if they did not contain a large amount of unseen matter.[2] Other lines of evidence include observations in gravitational lensing,[3] from the cosmic microwave background, from astronomical observations of the observable universe's current structure, from the formation and evolution of galaxies, from mass location during galactic collisions,[4] and from the motion of galaxies within galaxy clusters. In the standard Lambda-CDM model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the universe contains 5% ordinary matter and energy, 27% dark matter and 68% of an unknown form of energy known as dark energy.[5][6][7][8] Thus, dark matter constitutes 85%[note 2] of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95% of total mass–energy content.[9][10][11][12]


So, to question science is not a stupid thing to do - it's what has allowed mankind to develop. To constantly challenge the accepted.

Also, remember that Einstein was ridiculed for the theories and proven to me right in the end, so don't assume that the supposed numerical advantage of climate change scientists are correct. And no, I don't claim to be like Einstein, it's just that accept theories change.


A collection of various criticisms can be found in the book Hundert Autoren gegen Einstein (A Hundred Authors Against Einstein), published in 1931.[4] It contains very short texts from 28 authors, and excerpts from the publications of another 19 authors. The rest consists of a list that also includes people who only for some time were opposed to relativity. Besides philosophic objections (mostly based on Kantianism), also some alleged elementary failures of the theory were included; however, as some commented, those failures were due to the authors' misunderstanding of relativity. For example, Hans Reichenbach described the book as an "accumulation of naive errors", and as "unintentionally funny". Albert von Brunn interpreted the book as a backward step to the 16th and 17th century, and Einstein said, in response to the book, that if he were wrong, then one author would have been enough.[5][6]
Click to expand...

It is strange what time and perception can do, because I thought you stopped posting because you kept on being proven wrong and had no idea what would happen in a 'no deal' situation other than a pathetic hope that 'it will be alright in the end' based on nothing whatsoever :shrug:

But show us who kept on 'personally abusing you', because I, for one, would want to get them banned from NSC and I'm sure the mods are very hot on that :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:




larus

larus

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
6,580
In the land of hope and expectation....
WATFORD zero said:
It is strange what time and perception can do, because I thought you stopped posting because you kept on being proven wrong :shrug:

But show us who kept on 'personally abusing you', because I, for one, would want to get them banned from NSC :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

It’s pathetic posts from so many which make any debate pointless and the refusal to accept facts.

People saying that this is what we voted for (TMs deal). No it’s not - I hate the deal and want it voted down. The good thing is that her deal won’t get through, so the default position is a clean Brexit. Anything else needs legislation to go through the HoC and that looks unlikely.

Remainers won’t accept that the key players in the Brexit negotiations have been May, Robbins and Hammond. All remainers. Statements such as the leavers ran away, etc. David Davis resigned due to being bypassed by May/Robbins. Borris Johnson was never involved on the discussions. Nigel Farage was never in parliament to be involved.

Accusation of leave voters being thick, racist, xenophobic, etc. The constant use of gammon as an insult.

The refusal by remainers to accept that both sides lied during the campaign, but it was only the leave side who benefitted from these lies. Remainers want to complain about the overspend by the leave side, but refuse to accept that the government spent £9m advocating leave, which far exceeds to leave total spend.

Any negative economic news is treated as the fault of Brexit. The refusal to accept that the economy has done OK since the vote in spite of the predictions otherwise. In fact Germany had growth of -0.2% in Q3 2018 - imagine if that had been the UK. New bedsheets all around I fear.

You yourself go on about WTO, but there are many people who have written articles who have stated that the disruption risk is being vastly overplayed. And yes I do accept that after 40 years on close integration there will be some sectors which could suffer more initially. But remainers refuse to accept that this will be transitory.

For example, Roger Bootle has said WTO is not to be feared.
An article (which I pasted on here a couple of days ago as it was paywalled) by a civil servant actively working on preparations for a WTO Brexit stated that preparations are well advanced but are not being made public for political reasons.
I read another article by the head of UK ports (or something like that - apologies if I don’t remember his exact position/title), who stated that ports were more than capable of handling extra goods on WTO terms.

The EU has stated that is is preparing to ensure disruption is as limited as possible. ROI/EU have stated that there won’t be a hard border in NI.

So I don’t accept your premise that I’ve been proven wrong. Nothing has been proven either way yet. That will happen post March 2019 (but you may be proven wrong then, as you have stated that we won’t leave without a deal and that’s looking more likely than it was).

And on that note - I’m back out of here before the usual insults start. Add to that, that for 2 years on this thread, not one person has changed their viewpoint that I am aware of. So what’s the effing point of constantly posting as it gets nowhere.
 


WATFORD zero

WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 10, 2003
25,802
larus said:
It’s pathetic posts from so many which make any debate pointless and the refusal to accept facts.

People saying that this is what we voted for (TMs deal). No it’s not - I hate the deal and want it voted down. The good thing is that her deal won’t get through, so the default position is a clean Brexit. Anything else needs legislation to go through the HoC and that looks unlikely.

Remainers won’t accept that the key players in the Brexit negotiations have been May, Robbins and Hammond. All remainers. Statements such as the leavers ran away, etc. David Davis resigned due to being bypassed by May/Robbins. Borris Johnson was never involved on the discussions. Nigel Farage was never in parliament to be involved.

Accusation of leave voters being thick, racist, xenophobic, etc. The constant use of gammon as an insult.

The refusal by remainers to accept that both sides lied during the campaign, but it was only the leave side who benefitted from these lies. Remainers want to complain about the overspend by the leave side, but refuse to accept that the government spent £9m advocating leave, which far exceeds to leave total spend.

Any negative economic news is treated as the fault of Brexit. The refusal to accept that the economy has done OK since the vote in spite of the predictions otherwise. In fact Germany had growth of -0.2% in Q3 2018 - imagine if that had been the UK. New bedsheets all around I fear.

You yourself go on about WTO, but there are many people who have written articles who have stated that the disruption risk is being vastly overplayed. And yes I do accept that after 40 years on close integration there will be some sectors which could suffer more initially. But remainers refuse to accept that this will be transitory.

For example, Roger Bootle has said WTO is not to be feared.
An article (which I pasted on here a couple of days ago as it was paywalled) by a civil servant actively working on preparations for a WTO Brexit stated that preparations are well advanced but are not being made public for political reasons.
I read another article by the head of UK ports (or something like that - apologies if I don’t remember his exact position/title), who stated that ports were more than capable of handling extra goods on WTO terms.

The EU has stated that is is preparing to ensure disruption is as limited as possible. ROI/EU have stated that there won’t be a hard border in NI.

So I don’t accept your premise that I’ve been proven wrong. Nothing has been proven either way yet. That will happen post March 2019 (but you may be proven wrong then, as you have stated that we won’t leave without a deal and that’s looking more likely than it was).

And on that note - I’m back out of here before the usual insults start. Add to that, that for 2 years on this thread, not one person has changed their viewpoint that I am aware of. So what’s the effing point of constantly posting as it gets nowhere.
Click to expand...

Here are some very very simple Facts.

If we were to leave with your preferred 'no deal' on 29th March 2019 these are the tariffs that are in place (ignoring the problems with the rest of the world and just looking at the 27 countries which make up the vast majority of our imports/exports) to try and keep it simple. We won't even start on quotas as that could become complicated.

We go from completely free trade with our biggest economic partner to losing all trading arrangements with the EU 27 countries and these would revert to WTO default tariffs as follows.


WATFORD zero said:
The WTO default tariffs (the breakdowns of the various product groups are huge and run to pages and pages, as you can imagine) but in summary

Cereals & Meat - 45-50%
Processed foods - 25%-35%
Clothes - 12%
Footwear - 10%
Vehicles - 9%
Click to expand...

How the f*** is putting these tariffs on all international trade (for the EU and all other WTO members) going to 'work out ok in the end' ? (And this is just economically, we haven't even started on the procedures, systems and staff required to manage all these new tariffs).

These are the simple facts to follow your 'refusal to accept facts'.

Maybe ask Roger Bootle what he would do about the cold hard facts ?
Or your nameless civil servant actively working on preparations for a WTO Brexit
Or your head of UK ports (or something like that - apologies if you don’t remember his exact position/title)

You are just repeating the same crap that supports this complete fantasy. Tell me what the UK Lamb industry should to to alleviate THE FACT that in 83 days time 95% of their exports will increase in cost by 50% ?

I've never believed that all leavers were 'thick, racist, xenophobic, etc.', but I am slowly being persuaded otherwise.

Luckily for most of the non-thick, non-racist, non-xenophobic, balanced and well researched people backing 'no deal', this isn't going to happen :shrug:
 
Last edited:


Pretty pink fairy

Pretty pink fairy

Banned
Jan 30, 2008
31,981
WATFORD zero said:
Here are some very very simple Facts.

If we were to leave with your preferred 'no deal' on 29th March 2019 these are the tariffs that are in place (ignoring the problems with the rest of the world and just looking at the 27 countries which make up the vast majority of our imports/exports) to try and keep it simple. We won't even start on quotas as that could become complicated.

We go from completely free trade with our biggest economic partner to losing all trading arrangements with the EU 27 countries and these would revert to WTO default tariffs as follows.




How the f*** is putting these tariffs on all international trade (for the EU and all other WTO members) going to 'work out ok in the end' ? (And this is just economically, we haven't even started on the procedures, systems and staff required to manage all these new tariffs).

These are the simple facts to follow your 'refusal to accept facts'.

Maybe ask Roger Bootle what he would do about the cold hard facts ?
Or your nameless civil servant actively working on preparations for a WTO Brexit
Or your head of UK ports (or something like that - apologies if you don’t remember his exact position/title)

You are just repeating the same crap that supports this complete fantasy. Tell me what the UK Lamb industry should to to alleviate THE FACT that in 83 days time 95% of their exports will increase in cost by 50% ?

I've never believed that all leavers were 'thick, racist, xenophobic, etc.', but I am slowly being persuaded otherwise.

Luckily for most of the non-thick, non-racist, non-xenophobic, balanced and well researched people backing 'no deal', this isn't going to happen :shrug:
Click to expand...
Yes Paul
regards
DR
 


larus

larus

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
6,580
In the land of hope and expectation....
WATFORD zero said:
Here are some very very simple Facts.

If we were to leave with your preferred 'no deal' on 29th March 2019 these are the tariffs that are in place (ignoring the problems with the rest of the world and just looking at the 27 countries which make up the vast majority of our imports/exports) to try and keep it simple. We won't even start on quotas as that could become complicated.

We go from completely free trade with our biggest economic partner to losing all trading arrangements with the EU 27 countries and these would revert to WTO default tariffs as follows.




How the f*** is putting these tariffs on all international trade (for the EU and all other WTO members) going to 'work out ok in the end' ? (And this is just economically, we haven't even started on the procedures, systems and staff required to manage all these new tariffs).

These are the simple facts to follow your 'refusal to accept facts'.

Maybe ask Roger Bootle what he would do about the cold hard facts ?
Or your nameless civil servant actively working on preparations for a WTO Brexit
Or your head of UK ports (or something like that - apologies if you don’t remember his exact position/title)

You are just repeating the same crap that supports this complete fantasy. Tell me what the UK Lamb industry should to to alleviate THE FACT that in 83 days time 95% of their exports will increase in cost by 50% ?

I've never believed that all leavers were 'thick, racist, xenophobic, etc.', but I am slowly being persuaded otherwise.

Luckily for most of the non-thick, non-racist, non-xenophobic, balanced and well researched people backing 'no deal', this isn't going to happen :shrug:
Click to expand...

So, all of these people know so much less than someone who used to be a supplier to ma government department.

OK. Got it.

You are a prime example of the problem with this thread. Your failure to countenance that other, sharper minds than yours, say that this is being over played for political aims. But no, you know best. I'm surprised they haven't called you up to help them.

You are going to look so foolish when we leave and things get sorted with reasonable ease (post any short-term disruption).

Also, the EU as it currently stands is not it's final destination. It wants to become a federal state like the US and the countries will gradually cede more and more power. It wants central tax raising and tax rate standardisation, an EU Army, etc. Christ, they can't even get a single currency right and fools want to stay in :shrug:
 




P

portslade seagull

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2003
17,606
portslade
WATFORD zero said:
Here are some very very simple Facts.

If we were to leave with your preferred 'no deal' on 29th March 2019 these are the tariffs that are in place (ignoring the problems with the rest of the world and just looking at the 27 countries which make up the vast majority of our imports/exports) to try and keep it simple. We won't even start on quotas as that could become complicated.

We go from completely free trade with our biggest economic partner to losing all trading arrangements with the EU 27 countries and these would revert to WTO default tariffs as follows.




How the f*** is putting these tariffs on all international trade (for the EU and all other WTO members) going to 'work out ok in the end' ? (And this is just economically, we haven't even started on the procedures, systems and staff required to manage all these new tariffs).

These are the simple facts to follow your 'refusal to accept facts'.

Maybe ask Roger Bootle what he would do about the cold hard facts ?
Or your nameless civil servant actively working on preparations for a WTO Brexit
Or your head of UK ports (or something like that - apologies if you don’t remember his exact position/title)

You are just repeating the same crap that supports this complete fantasy. Tell me what the UK Lamb industry should to to alleviate THE FACT that in 83 days time 95% of their exports will increase in cost by 50% ?

I've never believed that all leavers were 'thick, racist, xenophobic, etc.', but I am slowly being persuaded otherwise.

Luckily for most of the non-thick, non-racist, non-xenophobic, balanced and well researched people backing 'no deal', this isn't going to happen :shrug:
Click to expand...

Swearing again you can't help it can you when you lose an argument. Always said when someone retorts to swearing to make a point the point is lost.
 








ManOfSussex

ManOfSussex

We wunt be druv
Apr 11, 2016
14,745
Rape of Hastings, Sussex
larus said:
On a scal of 1-10, about level 6-7 initially, but this will be short lived. This will east to level 5 and then gradually down to a level 1-2. Then after time, no noticeable disruption. By this point, the availability of humble pie will be dire though due to excessive consumption by remainers.



It’s common knowledge. Barnoer has said there won’t be a hard border. ROI have said there won’t be a hard border.
Just one of many articles.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/we-would-be-trapped-taoiseach-comments-show-hard-border-never-possible-says-arlene-foster-37543634.html
Click to expand...

Do you remember the Milltown murders and everything after in 1988? Personally I do. I also do recall the Brighton bomb, Deal and Ian Gow also.

I might be English/British like you, but I'm not a smug arrogant ****. Before I was 20 I was put in the A&E departments of RSCH, EDCH and The Conquest.....due to a night out.

Now, I'm British, but a Rangers/Celtic game meant Sky Sports to me, not a brain scan like it does to others in the West of Scotland or the North of Ireland. Like happens above due to people who dare to have a different affliction in it.

Barnier says there wont be a hard border...................I'm not that bothered what Barnier thinks - I remember what Thatcher, Kinnock, Haughey, Major, Hume, Blair thought...............Yes.......even that awful Tony Blair person too.

Take your views on the 'Irish border' and share them in your English accent in a pub in East Belfast perhaps?
 


WATFORD zero

WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 10, 2003
25,802
larus said:
So, all of these people know so much less than someone who used to be a supplier to ma government department.

OK. Got it.

You are a prime example of the problem with this thread. Your failure to countenance that other, sharper minds than yours, say that this is being over played for political aims. But no, you know best. I'm surprised they haven't called you up to help them.

You are going to look so foolish when we leave and things get sorted with reasonable ease (post any short-term disruption).

Also, the EU as it currently stands is not it's final destination. It wants to become a federal state like the US and the countries will gradually cede more and more power. It wants central tax raising and tax rate standardisation, an EU Army, etc. Christ, they can't even get a single currency right and fools want to stay in :shrug:
Click to expand...

So you can't dispute any of the facts but vainly hope that someone somewhere (you've no idea who), will know what to do and take responsibility for trying to deliver the fantasy that you voted for, but don't understand.

Just about sums up Brexit doesn't it :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:






nicko31

nicko31

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2010
17,572
Gods country fortnightly
WATFORD zero said:
So you can't dispute any of the facts but vainly hope that someone somewhere (you've no idea who), will know what to do and take responsibility for trying to deliver the fantasy that you voted for, but don't understand.

Just about sums up Brexit doesn't it :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you're wasting your time with facts on the "no deal / managed no deal / clean brexit" brigade, its a cult now.

I guess wish everyone of them could be sent an annual penalty notice for the cost of Brexit, its already cost us £50B and its rising by the day.
 


Westdene Seagull

Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,005
The arse end of Hangleton
Plooks said:
Says the climate change denier!?
Click to expand...

As usual Plooks you haven't bothered to comprehend what [MENTION=240]larus[/MENTION] posted. Here's a clue ..... he didn't deny climate change.
 


Westdene Seagull

Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,005
The arse end of Hangleton
Plooks said:
You both did. You both deny climate change and try and pass it off as natural and not important. Pathetic really.
Click to expand...

You really can't read then. Here's a helping hand for you as you struggle ..... look at his sentence that begins "Everyone accepts". I haven't denied climate change at all either .... point me to a post where I have done this. There has been climate change and it's not a good thing !
 




Westdene Seagull

Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,005
The arse end of Hangleton
Plooks said:
There. Happy now?
Click to expand...

:facepalm: ..... which words out of "climate change happens" are too difficult for you to understand. Where in that quote ( or anywhere else ) have I denied there has been climate change ?
 


Westdene Seagull

Westdene Seagull

aka Cap'n Carl Firecrotch
NSC Patron
Oct 27, 2003
21,005
The arse end of Hangleton
Plooks said:
You deny humans have caused it. Trying to play it off as natural. "Oooo humans have an effect I said that" yeah yeah. We KNOW what you mean.
Click to expand...

And once again - I've not denied humans have caused some of it. You know climate change means a change in the climate yes ? A bit like a few years ago there was an ice age .... a drastic change in the climate. I assume you'll be stating that wasn't natural either ? Whether you like it or not the climate changes naturally ..... humans have accellerated the changes and caused some of the changes but not entirely by ourselves.
 




WATFORD zero

WATFORD zero

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 10, 2003
25,802
Pretty pink fairy said:
http://beefandlamb.ahdb.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Sheep-outlook-Iss-4-Oct-18.pdf
maybe this might ease Watford blokes obsession with Lamb
regards
DR
Click to expand...

First paragraph of your linked article

Although the situation is still unfolding, throughout this forecast it is assumed trade conditions with the European Union and the rest of the world will remain as they are (i.e. the UK continues to have access to the EU with little disruption to trade).

You really don't help yourself, do you ?

Moron :lolol:
 
Last edited:






A1X

A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
17,754
Deepest, darkest Sussex
larus said:
On a scal of 1-10, about level 6-7 initially, but this will be short lived. This will east to level 5 and then gradually down to a level 1-2. Then after time, no noticeable disruption. By this point, the availability of humble pie will be dire though due to excessive consumption by remainers.
Click to expand...

Forgive me but that wasn't actually the question posed. Unless your answer that if the level 6-7 is exceeded then it's not worth it, or that if it continues at that level then it would also not be worth it? How long would it take us to setup an alternative to Euratom to allow us to move chemotherapy treatments around, most estimate it in terms of years rather than days.


larus said:
It’s common knowledge. Barnoer has said there won’t be a hard border. ROI have said there won’t be a hard border.
Just one of many articles.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/we-would-be-trapped-taoiseach-comments-show-hard-border-never-possible-says-arlene-foster-37543634.html
Click to expand...

So Arlene Foster saying it makes it true? Sorry but that doesn't exactly convince me. It also doesn't include any reference to Most Favoured Nation status under the WTO, which most who advocate No Deal claim we can start doing business on straight away (erroneously).
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here