[Politics] Brexit

[Half Time Pies]

HT Pies, you are on a hiding to nothing trying to PROVE points against Cunning. I'll get the pringles.................

Actually you are right, after days of following these threads its dawned on me...a leaver is never going to change their position because their views are ideologically driven. Its like arguing with a Christian about creation and the old testement, it doesn't matter what evidence you present to prove that their argument is flawed they simply won't accept it.

 

[osgood]

Comment article from the Telegraph.

A couple of weeks ago, I was at the hairdresser, head under the mixer tap, with several women using the basins either side of me. On the wall in front of us was a TV screen. The volume was muted, but we could read the headlines scrolling along the bottom.

I forget which particular warning from Project Fear was making news that day – Third World War, feta cheese shortage, pensioners to lose the right to watch Countdown… they all blur into one, don’t they?

Suddenly, the woman at the far end burst out laughing. The laughter was contagious. Soon, all five of us were cracking up. “Does anyone believe this stuff?” asked one of the salon’s mystified juniors. “No!” we snorted.

If the Remain campaign could have heard that laughter, they should have been afraid. Very afraid. Ridicule is dangerous stuff. Cynicism you can talk round, anger defuse. But mockery is something else. Mockery is like mercury. Once it’s out the bottle, there’s no getting it back in again.

Of course, five women with a fit of the giggles do not a focus group make, and yet that was the first time I truly believed that Britain might vote to leave the European Union. That hunch seems to have been correct. The latest YouGov poll gives Brexit a seven-point lead with women now more likely to support Leave (as are people aged 25 to 49). Guess what – women don’t like condescending, mainly male politicians lecturing them. Who knew?

There is panic in the Remain camp, and rightly so. Each new tactic comes across as an increasingly desperate Mr Punch beating up Judy and squawking, “Oh, yes, you will!”

“Oh, no, we won’t!,” the people shout back.

The female vote will be absolutely crucial on June 23rd. Judging by the vast daily postbag to this newspaper, women have overcome their instinctive caution and see the EU not as a source of stability but as a beast that devours its own children – and ours could be among them if we’re not careful.

Look how Brussels and Berlin are utterly indifferent as the young people of Spain, Greece and Italy are sacrificed on the Euro bonfire.

Notice how no one on the Remain side even bothers to pretend that Brussels is anything other than hideously dysfunctional. With its nepotism, protectionism, centralism, cronyism and sexism (not one of the seven Presidents is female), the EU has got more rotten ‘isms’ than a medieval Papacy.

How can that corrupt bunch of old freeloaders be the future when they are so clearly the discredited past?

But, hark! To win women voters back to Remain, here comes Samantha Cameron in “her first-ever newspaper article”. SamCam says she knows that people will think she has “a vested interest” in expressing her views. “They’re right,” says the PM’s wife, “I have got a vested interest: my children and their future.”

Mrs Cameron goes on to tell us how easy her posh leather goods company finds it to trade with the EU in contrast to the “expensive, bureaucratic nightmare” that is the rest of the world.

Funny, when I spoke last week to Sir James Dyson, our greatest living inventor and billionaire exporter, he had nothing but praise for the “expanding and exciting” global markets, compared to the shrinking EU whose politicised courts dispense not justice but shameless patronage to big manufacturers in Germany, France and Italy.

In a long article, SamCam finds space to warn about “the prospect of another recession”, but there isn’t a single sentence about the problems created for millions of British families by uncontrolled EU migration. Not for heiress Mrs Cameron the worry of getting her kids a place at a decent school or a foot on the housing ladder. Her attempts to identify as ordinary are painful. “I look at my daughter Nancy,” she says, “and think that in only six years she could be starting an apprenticeship.”

Eh? Nancy Cameron – an apprenticeship? What will that be in, then, sweetie? Welding?

Oh, puhleese. It’s patronising, Marie Antoinette-stuff like that which is inciting Britons to rebel. I don’t mean to be ungenerous, but if Samantha Cameron wrote that article herself then I am Jane Austen.

How typical of the Remain campaign that their appeal to female voters should be drafted by some special adviser who has even less clue about normal women’s lives than Mrs Cameron.

Samantha Cameron says she doesn’t want to take a “gamble” with her children’s future by leaving the EU. But women know the future of her children will always be safe because immense wealth and privilege will make sure of that. The kids we should be worrying about are those who will have to compete for jobs and collapsing public services if immigration continue at the rate of 240,000 every single year.

Just imagine the strain that will put on our schools, our housing, our hospitals and our environment in 10 years’ time. Only by leaving the EU can we guarantee a decent quality of life for children whose daddy isn’t the Prime Minister.

This week, the Archbishop of Canterbury told us that he was voting Remain, signalling that this was somehow the moral choice. Personally, I think a more Christian view comes from the former chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks. Dr Sacks has warned that, while a well-integrated, multi-ethnic society feels like a home, a multicultural society overwhelmed by immigration feels like a hotel where “everyone is a guest”.

What do we want for our children? A home or a hotel?

Next Thursday, we get to choose.




Wherever I drive now, all I see is Leave posters. I know of very few people who intend to vote remain. I am finally believing that Brexit can actually pull this off. Remain are running scared, as although people realise that there will be an economic impact, a lot don't care and don't believe the Remain camp lies.

Yes, hope this seems to be the case , we are Supposed to be having a democratic referendum, but keep being advised, cajoled then finally threatened by past and present governments , and all those that are happy with the current status quo,about all the "bad things" that will happen to us if we have the temerity to defy their will, this is tantamount to bullying , which isnt democratic, so what do people like us do ?

 

[Albumen]

So if Brexit win and we go into recession ....

... I presume those who voted leave will be happy to over-proportionately pay to cover this that voted remain?

Cheers.

 

[The Rivet]

Actually you are right, after days of following these threads its dawned on me...a leaver is never going to change their position because their views are ideologically driven. Its like arguing with a Christian about creation and the old testement, it doesn't matter what evidence you present to prove that their argument is flawed they simply won't accept it.

Trash

 

[Half Time Pies]

Having re-read your post. I wouldn't employ you. Too ideally driven and you spout mantra like your fingers themselves are cutting and pasting as you soak up the spin. I felt like that when I was young. Such a shame but it figures. In hindsight I'll employ you on £25,000 for ten years, want it?

I rest my case....rather than considering the evidence in the report your Brexit brain blanks out anything that might challenge your ideologically held viewpoint and instead you start spouting random gibberish and offer me a job!

 

[The Rivet]

Random? You drunk?

 

[Pondicherry]

If Brexit win and we move into a golden age of prosperity i presume those that voted to remain will be happy to pay their share to those who voted to leave. (as a token of their thanks)

 

[The Rivet]

Random? You drunk?

I'll tell you what, you do what you like boy. I'll do what I like.
I've said my bit, I think you and I shall say goodnight. I don't agree with you, I wont agree with you and I am happy with my position. The EU stinks and in my opinion a failed ideology. (Nice try to hijack the word sonny). Failed, like your argument. Look in the mirror, are you, you or who you are told to be? Look at that face as you shave.

Goodnight

 

[crookie]

... I presume those who voted leave will be happy to over-proportionately pay to cover this that voted remain?

Cheers.

That doesn't make any sense, have you been drinking ?

 

[GT49er]

We'll pay our fair share, just like all those expert millionaire tax avoiders in the financial world who want us to remain on board their gravy train.

 

[GT49er]

I rest my case....rather than considering the evidence in the report your Brexit brain blanks out anything that might challenge your ideologically held viewpoint and instead you start spouting random gibberish and offer me a job!

....and your remain brain doesn't block anything out that you don't want to hear?




Geez! - pull the other one!

 

[Phil B]

Did they work out which country we would go to war with if Brexit happens ?

 

[beorhthelm]

so if we vote to remain and go into recession, i presume those who voted remain will be happy, because at least they are going down with the rest of the EU ship eh?

 

[beorhthelm]

interesting view from Andrew Hilton in the Standard (in the remain camp). basic premise is that the referendum isnt binding and the remain dominated parliament would have to pass an Act to actually follow up, thats before we even invoke the Article 50 of Lisbon. so much for all the doom of the Remain camp, emergency budgets etc, nothing would change in our relation with EU for a couple of years. Johnston was ridiculed at the beginning of the campaign saying vote to leave then get a better deal.

 

[osgood]

at the end of the day , Osbourne has now declared war(by intimidating, fiscal threats ), on those that dare to oppose his opinion, in this referendum , which is meant to be a democratic proccess !
Think hes lost it, in more ways than one

 

[Triggaaar]

... I presume those who voted leave will be happy to over-proportionately pay to cover this that voted remain?

Cheers.

And if we stay, will those that voted remain be happy to compensate everyone else when we have to pay more into the EU?

 

[Deleted member 22389]

Turkey misses the deadline for visa free travel, but if you look at the article you can see people are actively working inside the EU to push these things through.

When Remain tell us that Turkey will never join, they are wrong. What the EU wants, the EU gets whether you agree on it or not.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...dline-visa-free-travel-eu-ambassador-withdraw

Here is another article about working with Sudan and Eritrea, so it looks like the EU will be sending money to these countries. So I presume they will be looking for more money from all the member states to fund this? Also further down the article is reads

But buried deep within the draft document, the most eye-catching announcement concerns the EU’s “Better Migration Management” project, which the draft suggests “will start this summer”.

What does this mean? Instead of just turning people back they are going to start legally accepting people?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/06/eu-sudan-eritrea-migration

 

[Deleted member 22389]

What a joke, if you didn't know already. What a waste of money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pafdzdZ3qXc

 

[cunning fergus]

Its quite ironic that we are talking about migrants taking British jobs on the day that record employment figures have been released and unemployment is at 5% the lowest it has been since 2005! Anyway rather than your supposition about migrant contributions lets talk facts...according to HMRC figures EU migrants that had arrived in Britain within the last 4 years paid £2.54bn more in income tax and national insurance than they received in tax credits or child benefit in 2013-14. So hardly a laughable amount.

I realise that you Leave campaigners don't hold much weight to expert opinion (pretty much ignoring pretty much every notable economists view that staying in the EU would be better for the British economy) however the following report for London School of Economics highlights the empirical evidence that shows conclusively that EU immigration has not had significantly adverse effects on average employment, wages, inequality or public services at the local level for people born in the UK.

http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/brexit05.pdf

The report shows that:

- EU immigrants are more educated, younger, more likely to be in work and less likely to claim benefits than the UK-born. About 44% have some form of higher education compared with only 23% of the UK-born.

- that the areas of the UK with large increases in EU immigration did not suffer greater falls in the jobs and pay of UK-born workers. The big falls in wages after 2008 are due to the global financial crisis and a weak economic recovery, not to immigration.

- There is also little effect of EU immigration on inequality through reducing the pay and jobs of less skilled UK workers. Changes in wages and joblessness for less skilled UK-born workers show little correlation with changes in EU immigration.

- EU immigrants pay more in taxes than they use public services and therefore they help to reduce the budget deficit. Immigrants do not have a negative effect on local services such as education, health or social housing; nor do they have any effect on social instability as indicated by crime rates.

"The bottom line, which may surprise many people, is that EU immigration has not harmed the pay, jobs or public services enjoyed by Britons. In fact, for the most part it has likely made us better off. So far from EU immigration being a 'necessary evil' that we pay to get access to the greater trade and foreign investment generated by the EU Single Market, immigration is at worse neutral and at best, another economic benefit."

You are right, I don't readily accept expert opinion because I have a tendency to question it.

There a multiple reasons why I question the assertion by "experts" here because the algorithm and what is factored in are not clear. There is a very basic supply and demand argument about a free labour market, and history demonstrates that workers pay is best protected when a labour market is controlled.

To assert that workers benefit from any uncontrolled markets is absurd, the Mike Ashleys' Sir Phillip Greens' Sir Fred Goodwins' and Goldman Sachs' of this world all neatly demonstrate that free markets will only benefit them and their kind.

The evidence on the ground proves this too, and if you and the experts are right then workers (the low paid in particular) would be rallying around the remain campaign and Labour MPs would continue on their message that a free labour market is great!

But only in recent times, following catastrophic election results and their traditional support base turning its back on Labour's long held capitalist message are Labour MPs now advocating controls on the open EU labour market.

Remember, experts would have produced evidence of WMD or that the UK had abolished boom and bust, we know different now.

 

[cunning fergus]

I understand the why you've drawn the SF comparison, but the two things are really not the same. Much as I disagree with all they stand for, the history as they see it would excuse their means.

Our relationship with / membership of the EU is not remotely comparable, IMO.

To answer your questions though, 1. Yes I do. 2. Probably not. 3. Mostly their cause, though I'm not sure they all really know what their ultimate aim is anymore.

Back to Farage - you give him way too much credit IMO. His politic beliefs are strong when it suits him, but he's happy to ignore them when it suits - such as employing his wife.

The motives of people to vote for largely single issue political parties are typically the same regardless of the political issue they are voting for, because their most strongly held political belief coalesces around that single political issue.

People voting for SF or UKIP know what they want, and can justify a vote for that political party on a largely single point.........for them it would be OUT.

It is your own sense of prejudice that prevents you understanding this political dynamic more broadly, and accepting at in other political parties their are tactics at play that help them in their political aims.

UKIP just like SF play a game to access expenses to further their aims, to expect otherwise is naivety of the highest order.......if they do something illegal then you would have a better point, but then we know compared to mainstream political parties UKIP have not been guilty of expenses abuse.

My point about Farage's belief is that he has campaigned consistently for Brexit for years, Corbyn and McDonnell have done so for longer. If you cannot understand or recognise that single point of difference and that he deserves a credit for that I can't help you; it is of course ironic that traditional Labour voters are siding with Farage and not Corbyn in this debate.

That is doubly shameful for Labour, and it's electoral prospects.