Brexit Discussion Thread.

[Footballwipe]

Edit

[sphericalfox]

1 minute ago, Footballwipe said:

Would be worth giving this 30 tweet thread on this guys timeline a good read. Quite revalatory

May - playing poker without a full deck.

[The Guvnor]

We voted to join the EEC in 73, the current 'EU' is unrecognisable in comparison. A timeline of this relationship shows we have not really ever been fully committed to the cause and have sought special dispensation on a number of significant issues.

It did bother me that there was 'previous' with regards to corruption in 1999 where all 20 Commissioners resigned before they were given the 'Spanish archer' it is such a massive entity now is there really any true accountability?

For me the real issue here was why we left it so late to leave almost to the point where we have been self consumed.

 

[Vacamion]

44 minutes ago, MattP said:

Hitler tried it with tanks, what he needed to do it with was banks.

 

 

Aaaaaaaand Godwin makes an appearance. 

 

[Guest MattP]

12 minutes ago, Vacamion said:

 

 

Aaaaaaaand Godwin makes an appearance. 

 

 I'm due one. 

 

Stolen this from a mates Facebook page as it pretty much sums up how I feel regarding what is currently happening.....

 

"Remainers are now actually saying "We told you Brexit idiots that the EU negotiations would be severe and that the EU27 would set out to punish Britain", not realising that this proves we were right to vote Brexit, the cynicism and meanness of the Brussels oligarchy right now -- their badmouthing of Britain, their leaking of high-level talks with Theresa May, their threats to make an example of us Brits so that other EU nations won't be tempted to follow us is precisely why we voted Leave: because we recognise this is a ruthless, opaque institution that treats democratic nations with utter contempt. The harsher they are to Britain, the happier we are that we voted out.

[Izzy]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

That's a nonsense argument.

 

Let me give you a hypothetical scenario: suppose there was a referendum on reintroducing slavery, and it was ratified by a small majority. Would you seriously expect those opposed to it to accept the democratic decision, and concentrate on making the best of it? To put forward their ideas for what kind of slavery they want?

 

Of course that's an extreme example,  but to those opposed to Brexit, the principle is identical - the only difference is the degree of perceived wrongness.

You're absolutely right Bucey

 

That is an extreme example 

[Buce]

2 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

You're absolutely right Bucey

 

That is an extreme example 

 

Regardless, the principle is identical.

 

I will accept all sorts of arguments as to why leaving is the correct decision; it's democracy isn't one of them.

[Charl91]

41 minutes ago, MattP said:

 I'm due one. 

 

Stolen this from a mates Facebook page as it pretty much sums up how I feel regarding what is currently happening.....

 

"Remainers are now actually saying "We told you Brexit idiots that the EU negotiations would be severe and that the EU27 would set out to punish Britain", not realising that this proves we were right to vote Brexit, the cynicism and meanness of the Brussels oligarchy right now -- their badmouthing of Britain, their leaking of high-level talks with Theresa May, their threats to make an example of us Brits so that other EU nations won't be tempted to follow us is precisely why we voted Leave: because we recognise this is a ruthless, opaque institution that treats democratic nations with utter contempt. The harsher they are to Britain, the happier we are that we voted out.

 

 

"Meanness"?!?

 

Come off it, you're scraping the bottom of the barrel here. If it was the Tories making decisions like this (or if the shoe was on the other foot), you'd say it was just good business sense. Complaining about the EU being "mean" makes you sound like one of those lefty-wet-special-snowflakey types that you openly mock. 

 

We've treated the EU with contempt for far too long, they owe us no favours. Of course they're going to look out for their best interests, in the same way that we're (apparently...ha!) trying to look out for ours.

[Strokes]

3 minutes ago, Charl91 said:

 

 

"Meanness"?!?

 

Come off it, you're scraping the bottom of the barrel here. If it was the Tories making decisions like this (or if the shoe was on the other foot), you'd say it was just good business sense. Complaining about the EU being "mean" makes you sound like one of those lefty-wet-special-snowflakey types that you openly mock. 

 

We've treated the EU with contempt for far too long, they owe us no favours. Of course they're going to look out for their best interests, in the same way that we're (apparently...ha!) trying to look out for ours.

Oh but we make a tough negotiating stance and it's sabre rattling but you lot all get aroused when Angela does it. Put the gimp masks away will you? 

[Guest MattP]

49 minutes ago, Charl91 said:

 

 

"Meanness"?!?

 

Come off it, you're scraping the bottom of the barrel here. If it was the Tories making decisions like this (or if the shoe was on the other foot), you'd say it was just good business sense. Complaining about the EU being "mean" makes you sound like one of those lefty-wet-special-snowflakey types that you openly mock. 

 

We've treated the EU with contempt for far too long, they owe us no favours. Of course they're going to look out for their best interests, in the same way that we're (apparently...ha!) trying to look out for ours.

I have no problem with them taking the line they want, if they want to hurt us and there own people they can, tariffs are never a smart thing for anyone.

 

I'm more concerned about the deliberate leaking, but I suppose we have to get used to it.

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, MattP said:

I don't want the future of my country being decided by subservient, safe space adoring, free speech stopping, gender denying cucks either but that's democracy.

 

The amount of actual racists in the country is tiny, the BNP got nothing at the last election, certainly nowhere near the 1.4 million you would have needed to see the refernedum go the other way.

 

That phrase actually came from Whitehall staff and civil servants, very few of who I imagine didn't vote remain - https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ministers-aim-to-build-empire-2-0-with-african-commonwealth-after-brexit-v9bs6f6z9

 

But it hasn't stopped people again deliberately trying to misrepresent it as a viewpoint and desire held by leavers, but I expect nothing else now.

 

 

Come on Matt, don't go full alt-right on us here - you're better than that.

 

Been an interesting discussion to read through the last few pages. My own twopennyworth hasn't changed much: a vote this polarising is going to result in some pushback regardless of result and being dismissive of that isn't going to help at all. Additionally, it's hypocritical to expect that the EU won't act in its own self-interest regarding negotiations (as the UK is) and so painting them as a convenient boogeyman for that reason.

[Charl91]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

Oh but we make a tough negotiating stance and it's sabre rattling but you lot all get aroused when Angela does it. Put the gimp masks away will you? 

 

 The difference is that the EU are negotiating from a position of strength. Whereas we're going to be fvcked otherwise.

[Strokes]

Just now, Charl91 said:

 

 The difference is that the EU are negotiating from a position of strength. Whereas we're going to be fvcked otherwise.

That's your opinion, I think we have a reasonable negotiating position. With all negotiations we will concede some things and gain others. If there is nothing to gain we will walk away and everyone loses out. Ideal scenario we lose freedom of movement, pay the divorce bill, agree a transitional trade tariff - pending a full deal, return sovereignty. I don't understand why that would be beyond us. All we are asking for is to be independent nation and with a trade deal. Can you explain what is so preposterous about that?

[The Guvnor]

3 hours ago, MattP said:

 I'm due one. 

 

Stolen this from a mates Facebook page as it pretty much sums up how I feel regarding what is currently happening.....

 

"Remainers are now actually saying "We told you Brexit idiots that the EU negotiations would be severe and that the EU27 would set out to punish Britain", not realising that this proves we were right to vote Brexit, the cynicism and meanness of the Brussels oligarchy right now -- their badmouthing of Britain, their leaking of high-level talks with Theresa May, their threats to make an example of us Brits so that other EU nations won't be tempted to follow us is precisely why we voted Leave: because we recognise this is a ruthless, opaque institution that treats democratic nations with utter contempt. The harsher they are to Britain, the happier we are that we voted out.

Spot on Matt

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

That's your opinion, I think we have a reasonable negotiating position. With all negotiations we will concede some things and gain others. If there is nothing to gain we will walk away and everyone loses out. Ideal scenario we lose freedom of movement, pay the divorce bill, agree a transitional trade tariff - pending a full deal, return sovereignty. I don't understand why that would be beyond us. All we are asking for is to be independent nation and with a trade deal. Can you explain what is so preposterous about that?

Let's say that my fears are misplaced and we get a decent enough deal that doesn't cripple our economy. That's the best we can hope for. If we got a 'good' deal i guess those of us who voted remain would just accept that the new order os established as well as it could be.

It's still likely to take 5-10 years to reach a final deal if the EU do play hardball during which time government will be consumed with the issue just to reach a place that is unlikely to be as beneficial (by which i mean in terms of trade and evonomics) to us as being in the EU.

I suppose the two divided camps will never agree on brexit as the point of contention seems to be whether the individual thinks the EU problems outweigh the benefits or not and our discussions here seem to suggest neither side are moving anywhere.

I've conceded that it is possible (theoretically rather than through the evidence of what i'm seeing from may and the eu) to make a deal that's good enough for me to accept as the best we could achieve.  I go back to my earlier post, how bad a deal would we have to get for you and mattp to concede it hadn't worked out as you'd hoped?

[Charl91]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

That's your opinion, I think we have a reasonable negotiating position. With all negotiations we will concede some things and gain others. If there is nothing to gain we will walk away and everyone loses out. Ideal scenario we lose freedom of movement, pay the divorce bill, agree a transitional trade tariff - pending a full deal, return sovereignty. I don't understand why that would be beyond us. All we are asking for is to be independent nation and with a trade deal. Can you explain what is so preposterous about that?

 

Because, in my opinion, the 'independence' will cost us a great deal for the return of very little rather other than the pride of a few people, who seem to see it as a thing of 'shame' or 'weakness' to be in the EU. We could be financially much worse off (even many Brexit supporters agree this may be the case, and we're already seeing it with the drop of the pound post-brexit result) for what? So people can feel like we're back in the colonial British-Empire days? So we can feel more "English"? So we can "control our borders" (something which all previous governments have shown no interest in doing, but just refuse to take flack for it)?

 

I don't understand the Sovereignty argument one bit. What difference does it make whether some rules are made by the EU instead our country? Maybe not all the EU's rules will have us in their best interest, but guess what, neither do our laws. Y'know who I trust more (especially in the case of things like human rights/worker's rights?) It's not Westminister, that's for sure. Guess where a lot of funding for our under-developed areas comes from?  That's what's preposterous about it.

 

At best, maybe in a decade or so we'll maybe back to what we would've been under the EU. If we're lucky. Best case scenario. The future of my generation has been jeopardised by a wave of jingoism and bigotry.

[The Doctor]

23 minutes ago, The Guvnor said:

Spot on Matt

As Charl has said, not really. The EU giving us a bad deal isn't them being a big evil institution we're better off free from, it's a case of it doing what's right by its members. 

[Strokes]

35 minutes ago, Charl91 said:

 

Because, in my opinion, the 'independence' will cost us a great deal for the return of very little rather other than the pride of a few people, who seem to see it as a thing of 'shame' or 'weakness' to be in the EU. We could be financially much worse off (even many Brexit supporters agree this may be the case, and we're already seeing it with the drop of the pound post-brexit result) for what? So people can feel like we're back in the colonial British-Empire days? So we can feel more "English"? So we can "control our borders" (something which all previous governments have shown no interest in doing, but just refuse to take flack for it)?

 

I don't understand the Sovereignty argument one bit. What difference does it make whether some rules are made by the EU instead our country? Maybe not all the EU's rules will have us in their best interest, but guess what, neither do our laws. Y'know who I trust more (especially in the case of things like human rights/worker's rights?) It's not Westminister, that's for sure. Guess where a lot of funding for our under-developed areas comes from?  That's what's preposterous about it.

 

At best, maybe in a decade or so we'll maybe back to what we would've been under the EU. If we're lucky. Best case scenario. The future of my generation has been jeopardised by a wave of jingoism and bigotry.

Well like you said, consecutive governments have shown no interest in solving the immigration issue and have shouldered the blame to the EU. They will no longer have that to hide behind, this goes for other issues 'blamed' on the EU. People have been arguing for years that the poor are getting poorer, the left have been claiming living standards are getting worse, education standards are falling, the NHS is in crisis, job creations are only low skilled post, heating or eating, housing shortages etc etc. This is all going on whilst in the EU and in a period of growth (yes I'm aware these are governmental issues) and people aren't benefiting enough from having a larger economy but they are the ones having to make concessions. Higher crime rates, multi faith schools, strained public services the list goes on. They don't see the benefits but they feel the negatives. Private companies investing in training apprenticeship is almost nil because they can take their pick from abroad, who loses out? The only thing a regular family in a regional service company is likely to lose from leaving, is a bit of extra time at airports for his annual week on the costa del sol. So why wouldn't he take the chance of stopping what he sees as an erosion of his country? To blame it on jingoism or bigotry is a very simplistic point of view and it's why the remain campaign never struck a chord with us. Where was the benefits for us, what did we get out of it?

[Buce]

7 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Well like you said, consecutive governments have shown no interest in solving the immigration issue and have shouldered the blame to the EU. They will no longer have that to hide behind, this goes for other issues 'blamed' on the EU. People have been arguing for years that the poor are getting poorer, the left have been claiming living standards are getting worse, education standards are falling, the NHS is in crisis, job creations are only low skilled post, heating or eating, housing shortages etc etc. This is all going on whilst in the EU and in a period of growth (yes I'm aware these are governmental issues) and people aren't benefiting enough from having a larger economy but they are the ones having to make concessions. Higher crime rates, multi faith schools, strained public services the list goes on. They don't see the benefits but they feel the negatives. Private companies investing in training apprenticeship is almost nil because they can take their pick from abroad, who loses out? The only thing a regular family in a regional service company is likely to lose from leaving, is a bit of extra time at airports for his annual week on the costa del sol. So why wouldn't he take the chance of stopping what he sees as an erosion of his country? To blame it on jingoism or bigotry is a very simplistic point of view and it's why the remain campaign never struck a chord with us. Where was the benefits for us, what did we get out of it?

 

 

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

 

 I wish I could think of that many positive things. 

[foxinexile]

Maybe I'm being cynical, but this whole "the EU27 are going to punish us for leaving" sounds like a very convenient scapegoat argument that can be used if leaving does turn into a disaster. It won't be the UK's fault, it'll be the evil EU punishing us for having the audacity to leave. Utter rubbish! We are choosing to leave, we are not being forced out. Why on earth would the remaining countries not want to protect their own collective interests? I find the arrogance of some Leave supporters in their assumptions, expectations and demands that we should be given a full dinner plate on departure astounding. Why would this be made easy for us? Why should it be made easy? Theresa May is at it too, trying to turn this into an "us versus them" scenario which I think shows how desperately she is already scraping the barrel. Now that Article 50 has been invoked, I think it's in everyone's interest to hope that we do get the best possible outcome - but if that outcome is slightly worse or considerably worse than what we have already, I think it would be wrong to blame "them". Rather it should give us foresight into our future role as a "global" Britain. If we lack the influence to negotiate a good deal with a group we've been part of since 1973, I think that sends a signal to the rest of the world (who we'll need to strike trade deals with) that Britain may be ever so slightly diminished outside the EU and not so "great" after all. Let's hope I'm absolutely wrong - nothing would make me happier if I am!

[The Doctor]

Seems a bit naive to think that governmental issues will be solved once we're out. The EU might stop being the excuse du jour (although given any deal we get will have to be worse than what we have now, I doubt it), but baring a seismic shift in politics we're still electing the same people unwilling to address those issues - far more likely a new scapegoat will be found.

[Strokes]

11 minutes ago, The Doctor said:

Seems a bit naive to think that governmental issues will be solved once we're out. The EU might stop being the excuse du jour (although given any deal we get will have to be worse than what we have now, I doubt it), but baring a seismic shift in politics we're still electing the same people unwilling to address those issues - far more likely a new scapegoat will be found.

Maybe we could blame the bankers, worked well for Labour.

[Spudulike]

So what could the motivation be for the EU Commission to leak the details of a private meeting ??

[sphericalfox]

2 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

So what could the motivation be for the EU Commission to leak the details of a private meeting ??

 

If they did, it'll be to reveal the incompetence of the leader who if actually elected will be negotiating on the British public's behalf.