Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[ajthefox]

12 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

Well no that's a shit tabloid spinning a story about him asking for more money into something about brexit whereas my link has the Belgian Prime Minister in his own words clearly and directly contradicting Webbo's claim that national leaders within the EU will stick up for us due to trade. 

 

If you lot on the right weren't so stubborn you'd see that for the debate ender that it is.

 

Edited 12 November 2017 by ajthefox

[fuchsntf]

3 hours ago, Webbo said:

I've not heard anyone mention £120 billion and I doubt we'll agree to £60 billion, if we did it'd only be 6 years contributions, we'd have to pay it if we stayed in. 

 

The govt has tried to meet the EU half way only to be rebuffed everytime. It's a game of poker to see who blinks first. Personally I think the only way we'll get a deal is to walk away. They need our money and there are 100s of thousands of jobs on the continent that depend on trade with us.

As much as £120 bill, have been mentioned, on various discussion programs even in passing on Skynews,

but thats not really my point. No one can really grasp financial implications involving

that simple word Billion (s). Its more the breakdowns, the information on totting up on paper

When facing the Public, so we slow-joes can grasp and interpret these amounts into our daily lifes and consequences. I am no financial wizard, but I did work for/at/with the various

WW-Stock-exchanges.Plus like the rest of the world, had to live to my household budget.

 

I still want to hear from the source, our own Government, not from social-media, or pub discussions, what £ xxxx bilions means for the UK govt itself, and to the man on the street.

Also like you, I sometimes have that thought...not bluff but turn around and deny the negotiation process involving "payback".  Go for it , let 'them' Worry about the payback, it wont

Stop the WWide status quo trading with us, I doubt it would stop individual EU-countries negotiating trade deals.

 

My worry at this period of our  history, Leading into the next few years then  decades of the Uk Future, is this horrible thought, that we dont have a good generation of competent Politicians at the Helm,who have anything favourable in their cupboards

, to carry out these discussions/negotiations,

plus keeping the home fires burning..plus involving their electorate on regular information platforms not with Political rhetoric and assumptions,

but with hard prognose outlaying at least the facts ,  where consequences then  can be opinonated upon.

The people of the UK, are being taken for a ride, could this farce over BJohnsons miserable Iran affair, then the Israel foolhardiness With priti Patel be deliberate trying to keep EU negotiations low-key,because this conservative govt cant deliver.... silly innit...but the only  other answer is we have a Whitehall full of, incompetent buffoons, sex predators and political  catastrophies walking the humble corridors.

 

Then heyho, we have no strength to fall back on with an opposition, in just as much chaos..!

Edited 12 November 2017 by fuchsntf

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Webbo said:

Not if they don't give us a deal.

Because the union has become more than trade and it's not what most of us want.

They will give us a deal, because we'll pay whatever they want

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

As much as £120 bill, have been mentioned, on various discussion programs even in passing on Skynews,

but thats not really my point. No one can really grasp financial implications involving

that simple word Billion (s). Its more the breakdowns, the information on totting up on paper

When facing the Public, so we slow-joes can grasp and interpret these amounts into our daily lifes and consequences. I am no financial wizard, but I did work for/at/with the various

WW-Stock-exchanges.Plus like the rest of the world, had to live to my household budget.

 

I still want to hear from the source, our own Government, not from social-media, or pub discussions, what £ xxxx bilions means for the UK govt itself, and to the man on the street.

Also like you, I sometimes have that thought...not bluff but turn around and deny the negotiation process involving "payback".  Go for it , let 'them' Worry about the payback, it wont

Stop the WWide status quo trading with us, I doubt it would stop individual EU-countries negotiating trade deals.

 

My worry at this period of our  history, Leading into the next few years then  decades of the Uk Future, is this horrible thought, that we dont have a good generation of competent Politicians at the Helm,who have anything favourable in their cupboards

, to carry out these discussions/negotiations,

plus keeping the home fires burning..plus involving their electorate on regular information platforms not with Political rhetoric and assumptions,

but with hard prognose outlaying at least the facts ,  where consequences then  can be opinonated upon.

The people of the UK, are being taken for a ride, could this farce over BJohnsons miserable Iran affair, then the Israel foolhardiness With priti Patel be deliberate trying to keep EU negotiations low-key,because this conservative govt cant deliver.... silly innit...but the only  other answer is we have a Whitehall full of, incompetent buffoons, sex predators and political  catastrophies walking the humble corridors.

 

Then heyho, we have no strength to fall back on with an opposition, in just as much chaos..!

To put it into context, 1% of growth is approx £15billion. Brexit has already seen us drop to the bottom of the g7 growth table. For every 1% less growth (and it's compounded year in year) we lose that amount. It doesn't take much to recover £120 billion if we get a decent deal and a government willing to invest to get growth going.

[fuchsntf]

52 minutes ago, toddybad said:

To put it into context, 1% of growth is approx £15billion. Brexit has already seen us drop to the bottom of the g7 growth table. For every 1% less growth (and it's compounded year in year) we lose that amount. It doesn't take much to recover £120 billion if we get a decent deal and a government willing to invest to get growth going.

Deal is a deal, we need more a decent government, than a decent deal....

But your explanation doesnt help the guys n gals on the street.I could puff up and give all the financial statements, growth tables,

Money stats on all the percentage Mean, and expected levels...

It means diddly squat, to the high class, middle class, working class, trying to make their own family targets and budget, they need

to appreciate and see strong level headed government.They dont just need their own spirit and drive, but a government that can

Support that drive, and reason to strive with motivation. Rich have no problems they're covered, they need politicians w h o takes

the countries needs to their bussom instead  of selfish point winning, and own life gains.

'The ' honourable minister Of her majestys Government'  has been lost...

Too many Dell boys on the streets, and in the corridors of power. The 'me'  has taken over and we are having to lump it.

Poltical discussion programs have become a joke. I actually thought some female..woman astuteness would helpvto change

Social awareness, and bring an inkling of common-sense to this modern forward moving society, they are just as wet as their

Male counterparts.

I am I suppose a socialist, but in all my voting years, I've seen a good many decent, excellent even, backbenchers and good

Cabinet potential, but quite  a few pulled away Disillusioned.There hasnt been a crop of a decent 5-7 from required  12 at any

time.I thought Blairs govt would bring a solid base of good minister potential, but they were mostly self centered egoistic

shadows hiding behind the cloak of socialism..

.I never liked M.Thatcher, but she had at least good base of a few competent knowledgable if not a full teamed

Cabinet.  The problem was the rest were fit Only  for their Spitting image Caricatures,

We have an embarassing, bumbling govt, and the oppostion, who could well take over, have no strong leading figures,

or believable mandate.....Even our Modern TV can only conjour up 'The Pledge', which is often occupied by cackling wafflers.

Though Michelle  Dewbury, carries her points well over, and doesnt get into that overshouting routine.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

I quite like the idea of a European Super Army and I actually quite like the idea of a United States of Europe with a massive European Parliament devolving powers to each countries governments.

 

If that was an official position, I would have voted remain.

[Guest]

Staggering. From Forbes.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/11/12/british-lawmaker-advises-investors-to-take-their-money-out-of-the-uk/#68a229ba4c1e

 

[Rogstanley]

34 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Staggering. From Forbes.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/11/12/british-lawmaker-advises-investors-to-take-their-money-out-of-the-uk/#68a229ba4c1e

 

*ignore the story and type out some intellectually dishonest drivel about Corbyn*

[Buce]

55 minutes ago, toddybad said:

Staggering. From Forbes.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/11/12/british-lawmaker-advises-investors-to-take-their-money-out-of-the-uk/#68a229ba4c1e

 

 

That’s a disgrace. 

 

I await the Tory supporters’ comments with interest. 

[Fox Ulike]

21 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

*ignore the story and type out some intellectually dishonest drivel about Corbyn*

It's called 'Whataboutism". It even has it's own Wikipedia entry:

 

Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda. When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union, the Soviet response would be "What about..." followed by an event in the Western world.

 

Most Brexit arguments peter out this way. You'll get used to it.

 

The parallels between Brexit and Soviet Propoganda are striking.

[Innovindil]

1 hour ago, toddybad said:

Staggering. From Forbes.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/11/12/british-lawmaker-advises-investors-to-take-their-money-out-of-the-uk/#68a229ba4c1e

 

Pretty good financial advise imo. 

 

Shame about the source of it mind. 

[Carl the Llama]

2 hours ago, toddybad said:

Staggering. From Forbes.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/11/12/british-lawmaker-advises-investors-to-take-their-money-out-of-the-uk/#68a229ba4c1e

 

The Labour party have been war gaming a hypothetical run on the pound, that's a bad thing because it proves their economic philosophy is broken.

 

The Tory party are recommending an actual run on the pound, that's a good thing because it shows real world pragmatism.

[Guest]

Government's day gos from bad to worse -

 

Boris forced into parliamentary apology and now backtracking over the Brexit bill now being voted on twice by mps - once in principal and if the deal is agreed by mps then through primary legislation. That also gives the Lords a say. 

 

Now we just need a climbdown on Henry VIII powers tomorrow.

 

But if any Tories are planning to respond to this can they also give their thoughts on the following article so it doesn't get missed.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/11/12/british-lawmaker-advises-investors-to-take-their-money-out-of-the-uk/#68a229ba4c1e

 

[Webbo]

Quote

 

Sounds sensible, doesn’t it?

No. It is an absolute disgrace for this man to give such advice.

You see, the Rt. Hon. John Redwood MP – to give him his full title – is a lawmaker. He is an elected member of the House of Commons. And not just any lawmaker. He is a senior member of the Conservative Party, which is currently in government and making a total hash of the Brexit negotiations. He is also a former Cabinet Minister and a member of the Privy Council.

This senior lawmaker is advising investors to stop investing in his country.

 

This quote here makes me doubt the neutrality of the writer.

 

I can't speak for John Redwood but it seems to me he's giving investment advice based on his opinion. While we're neither in nor out, uncertainty is affecting the economy, that's not news. Would you prefer it if he lied?

[bovril]

4 hours ago, toddybad said:

Staggering. From Forbes.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2017/11/12/british-lawmaker-advises-investors-to-take-their-money-out-of-the-uk/#68a229ba4c1e

 

Unbelievable we have traitor remoaners like this talking down the country.

[Carl the Llama]

13 minutes ago, Webbo said:

This quote here makes me doubt the neutrality of the writer.

 

I can't speak for John Redwood but it seems to me he's giving investment advice based on his opinion. While we're neither in nor out, uncertainty is affecting the economy, that's not news. Would you prefer it if he lied?

Tbh given how some have cried bloody murder at Labour for hypothesising a worst case scenario, treating it as Labour admitting said scenario to be a foregone conclusion should they take power and judging them unfit to govern because of it, I imagine he'd prefer it if those same people cried even worse bloody murder at a Tory MP actively encouraging that worst case scenario by recommending investors to back out of the country. 

 

I mean it's a simple consistent application of logic that if the fact of it being a possibility under Labour makes them unfit then it being recommended under the Tories makes them even more unfit.  I guess we go with the Dems then?  After all they've not planned for nor recommended a run so I guess that makes them the most fiscally sound member of the trio.

[Guest Kopfkino]

7 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Tbh given how some have cried bloody murder at Labour for hypothesising a worst case scenario, treating it as Labour admitting said scenario to be a foregone conclusion should they take power and judging them unfit to govern because of it, I imagine he'd prefer it if those same people cried even worse bloody murder at a Tory MP actively encouraging that worst case scenario by recommending investors to back out of the country. 

 

I mean it's a simple consistent application of logic that if the fact of it being a possibility under Labour makes them unfit then it being recommended under the Tories makes them even more unfit.  I guess we go with the Dems then?  After all they've not planned for nor recommended a run so I guess that makes them the most fiscally sound member of the trio.

 

There's quite a difference between publicly stating your own policies might cause a run on the pound and advising investors to invest elsewhere because of the BoE's policy choices. 

Edited 13 November 2017 by KingGTF

[Webbo]

5 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Tbh given how some have cried bloody murder at Labour for hypothesising a worst case scenario, treating it as Labour admitting said scenario to be a foregone conclusion should they take power and judging them unfit to govern because of it, I imagine he'd prefer it if those same people cried even worse bloody murder at a Tory MP actively encouraging that worst case scenario by recommending investors to back out of the country. 

 

I mean it's a simple consistent application of logic that if the fact of it being a possibility under Labour makes them unfit then it being recommended under the Tories makes them even more unfit.  I guess we go with the Dems then?  After all they've not planned for nor recommended a run so I guess that makes them the most fiscally sound member of the trio.

I don't think anyone cried bloody murder, I don't think I mentioned it at all. Anyway KingGTF explains it better than me.

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

I don't think anyone cried bloody murder, I don't think I mentioned it at all. Anyway KingGTF explains it better than me.

I think a few people went in hard on Labour over it.

 

1 minute ago, KingGTF said:

 

There's quite a difference between publicly stating your own policies will cause a run on the pound and advising investors to invest elsewhere because of the BoE's policy choices. 

Haha see what I mean?  Even when I'm being quoted explaining the hypothetical nature of Labour's exercise it's still treated as proof that they know they'll cause a run.  

[Guest Kopfkino]

Just now, Carl the Llama said:

I think a few people went in hard on Labour over it.

 

Haha see what I mean?  Even when I'm being quoted explaining the hypothetical nature of Labour's exercise it's still treated as proof that they know they'll cause a run.  

 

Yeah I corrected. Still it's good to see no other issues. Can tell you have now read his actual piece and know the forbes article to be sensationalist nonsense. 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, KingGTF said:

 

There's quite a difference between publicly stating your own policies might cause a run on the pound and advising investors to invest elsewhere because of the BoE's policy choices. 

Are you joking?

He spent years for calling for us to leave the EU then, when we (well, you) vote leave, almost immediately he sells his UK stocks. The article is right, it absolutely stinks of disaster capitalism.

And it has nothing to do with the BOE's policy choices. There is a looming credit crisis and there was before the Brexit vote. It has been caused by austerity politics. He's essentially admitted that the UK government is doing things wrong - note how he talks about the us and eurozone - he is talking about them seeking growth through investment. Unfortunately you were sold a pup by osborne but can't see beyond what you've been told by the government.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

I think a few people went in hard on Labour over it.

 

Haha see what I mean?  Even when I'm being quoted explaining the hypothetical nature of Labour's exercise it's still treated as proof that they know they'll cause a run.  

Well we were told Brexit is a disaster because the £ has dropped, about the only thing project fear got right, but the same people are saying that we should vote Labour even though Labour admit the £ will fall, so you can see where people are coming from.

 

If John Redwood is saying we'd be better off investing elsewhere that's up to him, it will affect very few of us, whereas a Labour govt is terrible for all of us.

[Carl the Llama]

Just now, KingGTF said:

Yeah I corrected. Still it's good to see no other issues. Can tell you have now read his actual piece and know the forbes article to be sensationalist nonsense. 

Well tbf I fully agree that there's a world of difference between preparing hypothetical responses to a negative scenario and real-world encouragement of that negative scenario.  Why you're so happy about him doing it is baffling to me if you had a problem with the idea of Labour causing a similar scenario.

[Carl the Llama]

1 minute ago, Webbo said:

Well we were told Brexit is a disaster because the £ has dropped, about the only thing project fear got right, but the same people are saying that we should vote Labour even though Labour admit the £ will fall, so you can see where people are coming from.

 

If John Redwood is saying we'd be better off investing elsewhere that's up to him, it will affect very few of us, whereas a Labour govt is terrible for all of us.

I love you Webs.

[Guest Kopfkino]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

Are you joking?

He spent years for calling for us to leave the EU then, when we (well, you) vote leave, almost immediately he sells his UK stocks. The article is right, it absolutely stinks of disaster capitalism.

And it has nothing to do with the BOE's policy choices. There is a looming credit crisis and there was before the Brexit vote. It has been caused by austerity politics. He's essentially admitted that the UK government is doing things wrong - note how he talks about the us and eurozone - he is talking about them seeking growth through investment. Unfortunately you were sold a pup by osborne but can't see beyond what you've been told by the government.

 

 you actually haven't read his column piece, have you? Or maybe you don't actually understand what his discussion is about. "It has nothing to do with the BoE" despite the main crooks of the article being a comparison between it and the policy choices of the ECB, BoJ, and Fed. And to think you've tried to accuse people on here of swallowing everything they read without questioning it.