Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Webbo]

Just now, KingGTF said:

 

Okay fair enough, you wouldn't have the costs associated with your current income of which some is given to the state in taxation (though I thought you claimed VAT back?). Point taken. 

 

As Captain said, there would have to be a change to the tax system for it to work anyway. Part of that for me would be to remove exemptions for VAT on food and children's clothes.

Not a high enough turnover.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

So what you're saying is the govt should assess IB claimants to see if they are genuinely unable to work? 

Towns all across the north of England went from normal employment/unemployment figures to suddenly having 25% of workers move from employment to ib in the 80s. It was a political decision to stop even further unrest in the north. This is all well documented. Ib I believe was subsequently taken out of unemployment figures. The issue hadn't been dealt with since and so, yes, very significant numbers still receive ib who should be on back to work benefits. The reports I've attached estimate around 750,000 currently. This isn't hard to understand.

[Webbo]

Where's Ken when you need him?  

[Guest]

But but but it's going to be easy and they need us not than we need them and they can go whistle and no deal is better than a bad deal.

 

David Davis concedes Brexit financial deal will probably favour EU

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/31/david-davis-concedes-brexit-financial-deal-will-probably-favour-eu?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

[Kopfkino]

23 minutes ago, toddybad said:

But but but it's going to be easy and they need us not than we need them and they can go whistle and no deal is better than a bad deal.

 

David Davis concedes Brexit financial deal will probably favour EU

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/31/david-davis-concedes-brexit-financial-deal-will-probably-favour-eu?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

 

Of course it favours them. We will end up paying them an amount of money we are not legally obliged to pay but will do so to smooth relationships and let us get to the more important stuff.

 

I don't think anyone has ever said that the financial deal will be favourable to us. It's kind of why Strokes et al don't want said deal.

 

In short, moot point

[Strokes]

6 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

 

Of course it favours them. We will end up paying them an amount of money we are not legally obliged to pay but will do so to smooth relationships and let us get to the more important stuff.

 

I don't think anyone has ever said that the financial deal will be favourable to us. It's kind of why Strokes et al don't want said deal.

 

In short, moot point

Hoping the government collapse now. Bring on the communism 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Hoping the government collapse now. Bring on the communism 

I always knew yours come back to us, comrade....

[Kopfkino]

13 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Hoping the government collapse now. Bring on the communism 

 

Won't be long, Boris' hands are wandering in the back of a taxi as we speak

[Fox Ulike]

11 hours ago, KingGTF said:

 

Of course it favours them. We will end up paying them an amount of money we are not legally obliged to pay but will do so to smooth relationships and let us get to the more important stuff.

 

I don't think anyone has ever said that the financial deal will be favourable to us. It's kind of why Strokes et al don't want said deal.

 

In short, moot point

 

Moot point? OMG this is actually Orwell’s 1984 with the Ministry of Truth re-defining the past.

 

We were told that when we leave the EU we would be £350m a week better off. Remember? There were no conditions attached to that claim, nor to the bus. There was no timeframe, no caveats and no mention of a divorce bill.

 

Nobody voted for a financial deal that favours the EU. There wasn’t a bus telling us how expensive it would be to leave the EU. So it’s completely relevant as it’s an example of how the promises of the Leave campaign simply won’t be met.  

 

I actually don’t have a massive problem with Brexit. It’s a bad idea, but it’s probably not going to cause another Great Depression. I’m just amazed how quickly people will choose to brainwash themselves about the terms and conditions on which the Leave campaign chose to ‘sell’ Brexit to the British public.

 

 

[Jon the Hat]

4 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

Moot point? OMG this is actually Orwell’s 1984 with the Ministry of Truth re-defining the past.

 

We were told that when we leave the EU we would be £350m a week better off. Remember? There were no conditions attached to that claim, nor to the bus. There was no timeframe, no caveats and no mention of a divorce bill.

 

Nobody voted for a financial deal that favours the EU. There wasn’t a bus telling us how expensive it would be to leave the EU. So it’s completely relevant as it’s an example of how the promises of the Leave campaign simply won’t be met.  

 

I actually don’t have a massive problem with Brexit. It’s a bad idea, but it’s probably not going to cause another Great Depression. I’m just amazed how quickly people will choose to brainwash themselves about the terms and conditions on which the Leave campaign chose to ‘sell’ Brexit to the British public.

 

 

I haven't met anyone who fell for the £350M a week claim - it was pretty well rebuffed at the time.  I know lots of people who believed and continue to believe with sod all evidence that the Brexit vote will destroy the country and that we are doomed.  That Frankfurt is suddenly going to takeover from London despite being less than 10% of the scale in the financial services sector.  Lets not forget the immediate recession and emergency budget we were threatened with - you see relaxed about that not coming true in any way shape or form.

I should think politcially speaking the EU wont be able to offer us a deal we really want, but we might sign it anyway.  Overtime this can evolve into something fairer to both parties. 

[Kopfkino]

17 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

Moot point? OMG this is actually Orwell’s 1984 with the Ministry of Truth re-defining the past.

 

We were told that when we leave the EU we would be £350m a week better off. Remember? There were no conditions attached to that claim, nor to the bus. There was no timeframe, no caveats and no mention of a divorce bill.

 

Nobody voted for a financial deal that favours the EU. There wasn’t a bus telling us how expensive it would be to leave the EU. So it’s completely relevant as it’s an example of how the promises of the Leave campaign simply won’t be met.  

 

I actually don’t have a massive problem with Brexit. It’s a bad idea, but it’s probably not going to cause another Great Depression. I’m just amazed how quickly people will choose to brainwash themselves about the terms and conditions on which the Leave campaign chose to ‘sell’ Brexit to the British public.

 

 

 

Nobody voted for anything but to leave the European Union, that was the vote. DD has said the financial deal will favour the EU because any money they receive is money we didn't have to give them. We are paying out to smooth things over, for goodwill, and to help the process of leaving along a bit. That's how its favourable. 

 

I'm not seeing any promises that won't be met. Anyway Jon has said it all above.

 

 

One for @Strokes, reverting to WTO will see exports to the EU drop by 2% at most because EU demand for our exports is fairly inelastic, particularly for goods likely to be hit with higher tariffs. http://voxeu.org/article/short-term-impact-brexit-uk-exports

[Jon the Hat]

I see some vague and not very serious sounding allegations against Damian Green this morning.  Brushed her leg?  Sent her a text about meeting for a drink when they have a history of meeting for a drink now and then?  Hard to see this as much more than someone with a Times column wanting to have her say on the issue of the day and needing an example to give her some credibility,

[Fox Ulike]

18 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

 

Nobody voted for anything but to leave the European Union, that was the vote. DD has said the financial deal will favour the EU because any money they receive is money we didn't have to give them. We are paying out to smooth things over, for goodwill, and to help the process of leaving along a bit. That's how its favourable. 

 

I'm not seeing any promises that won't be met. Anyway Jon has said it all above.

 

 

One for @Strokes, reverting to WTO will see exports to the EU drop by 2% at most because EU demand for our exports is fairly inelastic, particularly for goods likely to be hit with higher tariffs. http://voxeu.org/article/short-term-impact-brexit-uk-exports

 

So none of the promises or claims made by either campaign is of consequence. You believe there’s no responsibility or accountability for words or actions?

 

That seems a strange way to regard the democratic process.

 

 

38 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I haven't met anyone who fell for the £350M a week claim - it was pretty well rebuffed at the time.  I know lots of people who believed and continue to believe with sod all evidence that the Brexit vote will destroy the country and that we are doomed.  That Frankfurt is suddenly going to takeover from London despite being less than 10% of the scale in the financial services sector.  Lets not forget the immediate recession and emergency budget we were threatened with - you see relaxed about that not coming true in any way shape or form.

I should think politcially speaking the EU wont be able to offer us a deal we really want, but we might sign it anyway.  Overtime this can evolve into something fairer to both parties. 

 

Well i'm sure you didn't meet all 17million people who voted to Leave.

 

Let's not get drawn into extremes of "doom and destruction". The key point is this: A lot of people voted Leave because they were told that Brexit would make Britain better off.

 

The £350m claim is merely the flagship of this claim. The principle that the EU was a huge financial drain on the UK was widely spread and widely believed. Continue to convince yourself otherwise if you wish.

 

 

 

[Innovindil]

7 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

So none of the promises or claims made by either campaign is of consequence. You believe there’s no responsibility or accountability for words or actions?

 

That seems a strange way to regard the democratic process.

 

 

 

Well i'm sure you didn't meet all 17million people who voted to Leave.

 

Let's not get drawn into extremes of "doom and destruction". The key point is this: A lot of people voted Leave because they were told that Brexit would make Britain better off.

 

The £350m claim is merely the flagship of this claim. The principle that the EU was a huge financial drain on the UK was widely spread and widely believed. Continue to convince yourself otherwise if you wish.

 

 

 

And a lot of people voted remain because they were told we would have an instant recession and emergency budget. 

 

You are focusing on the lies on the winning side and ignoring the lies of the losers. Which is flogging a long dead, and still inconsequential, horse. 

[Fox Ulike]

Just now, Innovindil said:

And a lot of people voted remain because they were told we would have an instant recession and emergency budget. 

 

You are focusing on the lies on the winning side and ignoring the lies of the losers. Which is flogging a long dead, and still inconsequential, horse. 

So if both sides were lieing then what does that say about the result!!?

 

The horse is not dead. It's got four broken legs and rabies but there's life in the old girl yet.

 

The point is: We know so much more about Brexit now than we did in June 2016. On both sides.

 

A referendum on the Final Deal? Yeah or neiggghhhh?

[davieG]

Holding another referendum on Brexit would be the most "divisive" moment in British politics for more than 100 years, Lord Hague has said.

The former foreign secretary warned of the risk of a "hate-filled" campaign if the government attempted to revisit the issue and tell people "they were wrong" when voting to leave in 2016.

He said he would be "more likely" to vote leave if there was another poll.

"You can't go around in circles. We have to stick to the decision."

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, he said the UK's negotiations with the EU had taken a "fairly predictable" course up to now and it was incumbent on both sides to try and secure a breakthrough.

Lord Hague, a Remain supporter who left frontline politics in 2015, said that while quitting the EU without a deal could not be ruled out, he believed it would not be a good outcome.

Brexit negotiations to resume next week

Labour demands Brexit studies release

Neither the Conservatives nor Labour support another referendum on the terms of the UK's exit but MPs are demanding a vote in Parliament on the deal negotiated by Theresa May's government - although this is unlikely to prevent the UK from leaving in March 2019.

The Lib Dems have said the public are entitled to change their mind and should be given a final say on the withdrawal agreement in what they have claimed would be the "first referendum on the facts".

But the former Conservative leader suggested that would be calamitous for the country, given that more people had voted to leave the EU in June 2016 - when 17.4 million people, or 51.9% of those turning out, backed Leave - than had voted for any government in British history.

"It would be the most divisive event in this country since the arguments over Irish home rule at least, to try and go back over this issue," he said.

"Imagine going back to the people of this country and saying 'you got this wrong in the referendum, you may have turned out in record numbers and most of the country voted to leave but nevertheless we think you got it wrong and we are going to run it again'.

"Imagine the hate-filled campaign that would divide this country. I do not think that is a price worth paying."

The issue of whether to grant Ireland self-government within the UK dominated British politics for decades during the late 19th and early 20th Centuries.

 

[Innovindil]

2 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

So if both sides were lieing then what does that say about the result!!?

 

The horse is not dead. It's got four broken legs and rabies but there's life in the old girl yet.

 

The point is: We know so much more about Brexit now than we did in June 2016. On both sides.

 

A referendum on the Final Deal? Yeah or neiggghhhh?

It says people voted to leave the eu or stay in the eu. That's it. Politicians lie all the time, if we start speculating that that one lie caused this, in this case, the lie on the side of a bus causing a 1 MILLION person sway in a vote, then we will never have anything but elections here, elections there, referendums here there and everywhere. "I spotted a lie!" the losers would yell. "Re-run! Re-run!" again and again and again and again. 

 

Neigh, unless the referendum is between accept deal, or leave on wto terms. 

 

You organise a referendum on accept deal/stay in the eu, you destroy ANY power we have in negotiations. Which is some next level daft. 

[Carl the Llama]

1 hour ago, KingGTF said:

 

Nobody voted for anything but to leave the European Union, that was the vote. DD has said the financial deal will favour the EU because any money they receive is money we didn't have to give them. We are paying out to smooth things over, for goodwill, and to help the process of leaving along a bit. That's how its favourable. 

 

I'm not seeing any promises that won't be met. Anyway Jon has said it all above.

 

 

One for @Strokes, reverting to WTO will see exports to the EU drop by 2% at most because EU demand for our exports is fairly inelastic, particularly for goods likely to be hit with higher tariffs. http://voxeu.org/article/short-term-impact-brexit-uk-exports

That's not true at all.

[Fox Ulike]

18 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

It says people voted to leave the eu or stay in the eu. That's it. Politicians lie all the time, if we start speculating that that one lie caused this, in this case, the lie on the side of a bus causing a 1 MILLION person sway in a vote, then we will never have anything but elections here, elections there, referendums here there and everywhere. "I spotted a lie!" the losers would yell. "Re-run! Re-run!" again and again and again and again. 

 

Neigh, unless the referendum is between accept deal, or leave on wto terms. 

 

You organise a referendum on accept deal/stay in the eu, you destroy ANY power we have in negotiations. Which is some next level daft. 

OK. You're probably right. The horse is dead.

 

Still, the leave campaign was based on some next level bullshit, and even now, I believe it’s wrong to pretend otherwise, or to pretend that it doesn’t matter. It does. Or rather, it should do (as I seem to be in a minority here).

 

There was a big difference between the bullshit on each side. The story about instant recession was factual. It was from an IMF report. So not actually bullshit, but just an inaccurate prediction.

 

The big red bus was just an outright lie. But hey ho. Whaddyagonna do?

Edited 1 November 2017 by Fox Ulike

[Innovindil]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

That's not true at all.

Any links to where we're legally obliged to pay it? 

[Innovindil]

Just now, Fox Ulike said:

OK. You're probably right. The horse is dead.

 

Still, the leave campaign was based on some next level bullshit, and even now, I believe it’s wrong to pretend otherwise, or to pretend that it doesn’t matter. It does. It rather, it should do (as I seem to be in a minority here).

 

There was a big difference between the bullshit on each side. The story about instant recession was factual. It was from an IMF report. So not actually bullshit, but just an inaccurate prediction.

 

The big red bus was just an outright lie. But hey ho. Whaddyagonna do?

I'm going to vote brexit. And whenever someone says "you voted brexit because of the bus!" I'll point out that they're wrong. 

 

Not much more I can do I fear. 

[Jon the Hat]

Just now, Fox Ulike said:

 

So none of the promises or claims made by either campaign is of consequence. You believe there’s no responsibility or accountability for words or actions?

 

That seems a strange way to regard the democratic process.

 

 

 

Well i'm sure you didn't meet all 17million people who voted to Leave.

 

Let's not get drawn into extremes of "doom and destruction". The key point is this: A lot of people voted Leave because they were told that Brexit would make Britain better off.

 

The £350m claim is merely the flagship of this claim. The principle that the EU was a huge financial drain on the UK was widely spread and widely believed. Continue to convince yourself otherwise if you wish.

 

 

 

We will have more control over our spending outside the EU than inside it.  Don't forget the whole discussion about the NET spend ignores the fact that we don't get to choose where the EU funds spent in the UK go.  Some of it is good, but certainly not all of it.

I still believe in the long run Brexit will make us better off, mainly because the EU will collapse.

[Fox Ulike]

2 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

We will have more control over our spending outside the EU than inside it.  Don't forget the whole discussion about the NET spend ignores the fact that we don't get to choose where the EU funds spent in the UK go.  Some of it is good, but certainly not all of it.

I still believe in the long run Brexit will make us better off, mainly because the EU will collapse.

Put that on the side of a bus.I would have no problem then...  

 

What anyone believes in the 'long run' is of little relevance. I believe in the long run we'll experience a slow decline, and people won't put up with it. So we'll rejoin the EU, making the whole thing utterly pointless. But like you, I have no evidence to back this up.

 

All we know is that we were told we'd be better off. Some people voted for this. And there's no evidence that we will be. What happens five or ten years down the line is no justification one way or the other.

 

4 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

I'm going to vote brexit. And whenever someone says "you voted brexit because of the bus!" I'll point out that they're wrong. 

 

Not much more I can do I fear. 

I know i'm probably a bit late to the party here: But why did you vote Brexit? Especially if you had no illusions that we'd be better off after exiting the EU.

[Strokes]

54 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

So none of the promises or claims made by either campaign is of consequence. You believe there’s no responsibility or accountability for words or actions?

 

That seems a strange way to regard the democratic process.

 

 

 

Well i'm sure you didn't meet all 17million people who voted to Leave.

 

Let's not get drawn into extremes of "doom and destruction". The key point is this: A lot of people voted Leave because they were told that Brexit would make Britain better off.

 

The £350m claim is merely the flagship of this claim. The principle that the EU was a huge financial drain on the UK was widely spread and widely believed. Continue to convince yourself otherwise if you wish.

 

 

 

We are a net contributor to the EU, of course it is a financial drain.

[Kopfkino]

51 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

 

So none of the promises or claims made by either campaign is of consequence. You believe there’s no responsibility or accountability for words or actions?

 

That seems a strange way to regard the democratic process.

 

 

 

People have responsibility for their words, yes. As for accountability, I'm not sure how you expect to hold those who said certain things accountable for their words, it's democratically impossible in this country to do so. You can hold the government accountable for its interpretation of the result and it's actioning of that result but not a lot else. 

 

I'm yet to see what promises have been broken. I don't really see any promises were made but maybe that's down to interpretation, you see claims as promises, I see claims as claims to consider objectively. Maybe the bus was implicit, but I read it as we send an amount of money to the EU, look what else that money could be used on.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

That's not true at all.

 

"The Brexit secretary insisted there was no legal obligation for the UK to pay sums for EU projects after leaving the bloc, even those approved while the UK was a member, but conceded there were “moral or political” reasons to reach a financial settlement." Do share where my untruths are?