Also in the news

[Dr The Singh]

4 minutes ago, Milo said:

So I'm a racist? 

 

Happy to meet up for a beer to discuss just how you've come to this conclusion 

Your buying, and mine is a pint of top shelf and the finisher champers please.

 

Btw, your not a racist, maybe abit unusual

[Fox In The Box 90]

45 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

So what you’ve done now is jumped to conclusions and put everyone in the same box. Exactly the problem any future remain campaign would fall foul to. I did not vote to Leave (though I was not against it), but I do support leaving to respect the referendum and believe it can be a success and have always backed an EEA/EFTA version of Leave whilst fully realising it doesn’t necessarily respect the referendum.

 

Therefore, with that in mind, I am fully aware that an opposition to regulatory alignment with the EU is not compatible with a desire to do FTAs, particularly with the USA. In doing a deal with Australia we would be accepting EU standards as that’s the direction Australia is headed. The EU is one of two, increasingly three, regulatory superpowers so we are still going to be adhering to EU standards on many things. This would also be subject arbitration at a supernational level but arbitration of FTAs is far different to the current role of the ECJ over the UKSC. Moreover, not all Leave voters are gagging for us to be a free trading nation, Strokes I believe thinks like this.

 

On the third point. I am not agreeing I or anyone will be worse off. I am not stating an opinion on that front. I am saying how some Leave voters would think - that if they think they’ll be worse off in absolute wealth terms, that really may not matter to them. That’s the whole problem with this insistence from many remainers talking in economic absolute wealth terms - being better or worse off for many isn’t only categorised in economic terms but in terms of sovereignty, democracy, a feeling of control. And I don’t see how having that opinion would then stop someone talking about project fear?

 

 

 

I’ve spent the last 6 months speaking to Leave voters from across the political spectrum, from across the country to help with someone’s research and I’ve also read as much as there is out there on these kind of things. In fact I was with 15 people in North Kent on Monday that outlined exactly what I said above. Maybe you’d benefit from doing similar.

Youre giving leave voters way, way too much credit. Maybe SOME genuinely want to be poorer for the sake of "sovereignty" but this "sovereignty" is something we will be giving away any time we make a relationship of any kind with another country or trading bloc and it wont allow them to do anything they couldnt already do.

 

I can boot out my MP they say. Well you already could so youve gained nothing. And just because the UK has "control" its not going to make laws that suit everyone every time. 

 

Everyone but the tiniest minority wanted to be BETTER off and thought leaving the EU would achieve that. Its because its obvious that it wont, at least for a long, long time, that voters have to pretend that "control" and "sovereignty"...things that cant be quantified or measured, are most important to them. They never were.

 

Brexit is everything to everyone. THATS why it commanded a 52% vote. If your EEA/EFTA idea was put to the people v remain, it wouldnt win. If no deal was put to the people v remain, it wouldnt win either.

 

The referendum was remain v norway +/canada +/ some sort of bespoke deal/ leave it to may to sort a deal/ no deal all in one.

 

THATS why it won. Its anything to anyone, making it nothing.

 

When you say people shouldnt be disqualified from using "project fear" its very simple.

 

Experts from many fields have been HEAVILY derided for predictions of economic harm, job losses, loss of personal wealth. They have been branded as spreading fear and scaremongering. You cannot criticise someone under "project fear" if you think everything they are predicting is the collateral damage of getting what you want, because you agree with them.

 

And are you so gullible to think when you do your research people are telling you the truth ALL the time? How many people have you researched that have said "i hate foreigners"?? Compare that to how many people out there GENUINELY hate foreigners. There are millions.

 

Dont try and twist what i said into "every leave voter is racist" i did not say that.

 

I am saying a proportion of voters enough to be a psychgraphic within leave would hold that opinion. But they arent going to tell you that, theyll cover it up with control, sovereignty etc.

 

Ill absolutely sum up the whole debate for you. NO ONE wanted to leave the EU. There was a growing UKIP resurgence going on and pressure within the conservatives, so cameron called a referendum.

 

Everyone believed remain would win. But people like Boris wanted to lose as narrowly as possible to weaken cameron to further their own career. Other politicians just wanted to turn the UK into a complete deregulated capitalist nation for their own gains like Rees Mogg.

 

They started campaigning and knew EXACTLY what buttons to press with the public. Breaking point posters, dont listen to experts, more money for this that and the other.

 

The public walked into it like a mouse into a mousetrap and delivered a leave vote.

 

NONE OF THEM had planned for it or had a clue what theyd do next.

 

NONE OF THEM want responsibility either. They want to hide behind may and throw tomatoes and bleat afterwards if ONLY WED DONE IT MY WAY we would be better off.

[bovril]

It's obviously unfair to say the majority of Leavers are racists but it's not that surprising that people believe that considering there don't seem to be that many arguments in favour of Brexit at the moment other than reducing immigration (if you see that as a benefit), and that people are seemingly willing to give up their own rights to live and work visa-free in 27 other EU countries if it means EU citizens can no longer do the same here. 

Personally I don't think it was so much about racism, more a kind of arrogance and slightly smug sense of superiority that a country like Britain shouldn't be in a trading bloc with 'inferior' countries like Greece or Romania, for example. Coupled with the unhinged-Daily-Express-readers kind of world view that continental Europeans are automatically out to screw over the plucky Brits. 

Edited 14 March 2019 by bovril

[Kopfkino]

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

Youre giving leave voters way, way too much credit. Maybe SOME genuinely want to be poorer for the sake of "sovereignty" but this "sovereignty" is something we will be giving away any time we make a relationship of any kind with another country or trading bloc and it wont allow them to do anything they couldnt already do.

 

61% of Leave voters said that significant damage to the UK economy was a price worth paying for Brexit. 40% said it was worth losing their or a relatives job, more than said wouldn’t be worth it. So they it’s quite clear a significant portion value something more than plain economics.

You don’t need to tell me that national sovereignty is naturally eroded in the modern world and it won’t be returning as it was many moons ago. But, you’ve just shown how it will allow them to do something they couldn’t already do. That we might operate an independent trade policy means we will have to talk about trade policy and decisions will be made about it in Westminster. 

 

Not that sovereignty, control, or democracy was the only non economic driver. Security was another.

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

NO ONE wanted to leave the EU. There was a growing UKIP resurgence going on

s something that hasn’t happened for 40 years. That is exactly a return of some sovereignty -being able to sign it back away. 

 

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

I can boot out my MP they say. Well you already could so youve gained nothing. And just because the UK has "control" its not going to make laws that suit everyone every time. 

Well you have gained if MPs now have more things they have to legislate on. You have more to hold them account against and you actually have someone to hold to account for those decisions. It doesn’t have to be the policy they want but it’s about who governs for who and who decides for who. Already many analysts attribute the softening attitude to immigration numbers as partly because people anticipate that the UK will be able to control numbers yet numbers haven’t changed. It does make a difference for many people whether you think so or not.

 

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

Everyone but the tiniest minority wanted to be BETTER off and thought leaving the EU would achieve that. Its because its obvious that it wont, at least for a long, long time, that voters have to pretend that "control" and "sovereignty"...things that cant be quantified or measured, are most important to them. They never were.

The polling above shows you’re wrong. Control and sovereignty showed up in polling long before the referendum campaign. Eurosceptisism is long baked in.

 

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

If your EEA/EFTA idea was put to the people v remain, it wouldnt win. If no deal was put to the people v remain, it wouldnt win either.

Conjecture

 

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

THATS why it won. Its anything to anyone, making it nothing.

It won because a majority of voters decided they no longer wanted to be a part of the EU for which there were numerous reasons. Just as in every democratic vote, people have different reasons for their vote, it doesn’t make them any less valid. Just as if I vote for x party in a general election, it won’t be for exactly the same reasons as other voters, nor cos I agree with every single policy.

 

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

Experts from many fields have been HEAVILY derided for predictions of economic harm, job losses, loss of personal wealth. They have been branded as spreading fear and scaremongering. You cannot criticise someone under "project fear" if you think everything they are predicting is the collateral damage of getting what you want, because you agree with them.

 

It’s not really inconsistent to say I am not so bothered by the economic consequence but to at the same time brand Treasury forecasts to be project fear. Not putting weight on something doesn’t mean I then can’t express an opinion on that matter. 

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

And are you so gullible to think when you do your research people are telling you the truth ALL the time? How many people have you researched that have said "i hate foreigners"?? Compare that to how many people out there GENUINELY hate foreigners. There are millions.

We are perfectly aware of the possible limitations of conducting interviews with people, particularly retrospectively 2-3 years later. However, I am quite confident that speaking to hundreds of people about how they feel and why they voted the way they did is a far more effective way of understanding than having to read the thoughts of someone that’s seemingly hardly tried to understand it beyond tired tropes, trite statements, and basic bromide. A really daft remark there.

 

1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

NO ONE wanted to leave the EU. There was a growing UKIP resurgence going on

So nobody wanted to Leave but people were voting for UKIP. Right cos that makes sense. Still finally we have found some actual cognitive dissonance going on.

Edited 14 March 2019 by Kopfkino

[Mike Oxlong]

Tory MP Scott Mann ridiculed for 'fit knives with GPS trackers' call
http://news.sky.com/story/tory-mp-scott-mann-ridiculed-for-fit-knives-with-gps-trackers-call-11665366

 

 

“... it was a bit of a s*** idea”  

Edited 14 March 2019 by Mike Oxlong

[Fox In The Box 90]

Just now, Kopfkino said:

 

61% of Leave voters said that significant damage to the UK economy was a price worth paying for Brexit. 40% said it was worth losing their or a relatives job, more than said wouldn’t be worth it. So they it’s quite clear a significant portion value something more than plain economics.

You don’t need to tell me that national sovereignty is naturally eroded in the modern world and it won’t be returning as it was many moons ago. But, you’ve just shown how it will allow them to do something they couldn’t already do. That we might operate an independent trade policy means we will have to talk about trade policy and decisions will be made about it in Westminster. That i

s something that hasn’t happened for 40 years. That is exactly a return of some sovereignty -being able to sign it back away. 

 

Well you have gained if MPs now have more things they have to legislate on. You have more to hold them account against and you actually have someone to hold to account for those decisions. It doesn’t have to be the policy they want but it’s about who governs for who and who decides for who. Already many analysts attribute the softening attitude to immigration numbers as partly because people anticipate that the UK will be able to control numbers yet numbers haven’t changed. It does make a difference for many people whether you think so or not.

 

The polling above shows you’re wrong. Control and sovereignty showed up in polling long before the referendum campaign. Eurosceptisism is long baked in.

 

Conjecture

 

It won because a majority of voters decided they no longer wanted to be a part of the EU for which there were numerous reasons. Just as in every democratic vote, people have different reasons for their vote, it doesn’t make them any less valid. Just as if I vote for x party in a general election, it won’t be for exactly the same reasons as other voters, nor cos I agree with every single policy.

 

 

It’s not really inconsistent to say I am not so bothered by the economic consequence but to at the same time brand Treasury forecasts to be project fear. Not putting weight on something doesn’t mean I then can’t express an opinion on that matter. 

We are perfectly aware of the possible limitations of conducting interviews with people, particularly retrospectively 2-3 years later. However, I am quite confident that speaking to hundreds of people about how they feel and why they voted the way they did is a far more effective way of understanding than having to read the thoughts of someone that’s seemingly hardly tried to understand it beyond tired tropes, trite statements, and basic bromide. A really daft remark there.

 

So nobody wanted to Leave but people were voting for UKIP. Right cos that makes sense. Still finally we have found some actual cognitive dissonance going on.

With regards to project fear youre simply talking guff. 61% of people would accept significant damage to the econony and 40% of people (4 in 10 leavers) would happily lose their job, or see their wife or kids lose theirs? Pull the other one its got bells on.

 

And if those absolutely ridiculous numbers were true, why is project fear even a thing? If 61% of people accept significant economic damage, then why do people on the leave side do everything to make people ignore experts telling them there will be significant economic damage?

 

Your first paragraph...people voted to take back sovereignty so they could sign it back away. Alright lol.

 

Softening attitudes towards immigration.... the UK could have enacted a stricter immigration policy anyway. Belgium and Germany do. We could have deported people if we wanted. WE chose not to. We were not forced into anything.

 

Your interviews arent going to collect very good data. People are going to lie to you, come on be honest with yourself. No one is going to say the perceived "wrong things" to you. They just arent.

 

And if UKIP had any purpose, theyd have all the answers on brexit. A party whos sole existence was to remove us from the EU. Having achieved their goal, they should have all the answers on how to be a great independent nation. But now theyre totally insignificant.

 

You dont even understand the concept of cognitive dissonance.

 

So wed better leave it there.

[Kopfkino]

28 minutes ago, Fox In The Box 90 said:

With regards to project fear youre simply talking guff. 61% of people would accept significant damage to the econony and 40% of people (4 in 10 leavers) would happily lose their job, or see their wife or kids lose theirs? Pull the other one its got bells on.

 

And if those absolutely ridiculous numbers were true, why is project fear even a thing? If 61% of people accept significant economic damage, then why do people on the leave side do everything to make people ignore experts telling them there will be significant economic damage?

 

Your first paragraph...people voted to take back sovereignty so they could sign it back away. Alright lol.

 

Softening attitudes towards immigration.... the UK could have enacted a stricter immigration policy anyway. Belgium and Germany do. We could have deported people if we wanted. WE chose not to. We were not forced into anything.

 

Your interviews arent going to collect very good data. People are going to lie to you, come on be honest with yourself. No one is going to say the perceived "wrong things" to you. They just arent.

 

And if UKIP had any purpose, theyd have all the answers on brexit. A party whos sole existence was to remove us from the EU. Having achieved their goal, they should have all the answers on how to be a great independent nation. But now theyre totally insignificant.

 

You dont even understand the concept of cognitive dissonance.

 

So wed better leave it there.

 

Youre right we should leave it there because I really would hate for you to exit your bubble of trite vapidity and ignorance. And I absolutely will leave it after this but I can’t allow some of the nonsense in this to lay.

 

Actual pollsters from actual polling companies asked actual people what their views were wrt to the price of Brexit but you refuse to believe it possible cos it doesn’t suit the narrative that is comfortable in your head.

 

For two reasons the project fear argument remains. One is that you don’t need to be bothered by economic consequences to refute claims about it. But also, that a significant number believe it’s a price worth paying, not everyone does so it’s just a campaign tactic to sure up support. That’s not really out of the ordinary nor does it change how some people are thinking.

 

Yes people want control matters rather than feeling some technocrats in Europe control matters. It’s not difficult. Control was signed away without people having a say in three massive treaties: Maasticht, Amsterdam, Lisbon - people just want a say.

 

The UK could have had stricter immigration and citizens have said that successive governments have failed to adequately control immigration, there has been displeasure at the choices that governments have made and that voters haven’t had an alternative. That’s helped deliver Brexit no doubt, won’t disagree and shows the disconnect that runs much deeper than Brexit.

 

But the government can’t have total control whilst in the EU anyway. Nor could it adopt a stricter immigration policy as some European nations have without changing the relationship between the state, police, and citizens. Because to do, as Belgium does, you have to have a register of citizens and ID cards or something similar. However, the idea of civil liberties and the relationship between state, police and citizens is different in the UK such that such things have long met much opposition. A tough political choice. In fact we see right now there is a dissatisfaction with EU migrants having to register to stay in the country post Brexit. 

 

Tbh, I have much more confidence in the ability to conduct research of the person who requires this research and designed the research than I do in your opinions of said research. You seem to have a problem with Brexiteers dismissing the experts but you’re essentially dismissing this person’s expertise in conducting research. I’ll pass on your concerns mind.

[Bellend Sebastian]

As long as I get the "red, white and blue" Brexit I was promised, I'll be happy

[urban.spaceman]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-47578798

 

Multiple fatalities in a mass shooting at a Mosque in Christchurch.

 

He live-streamed the attack on facebook from his GoPro camera.

 

I don’t understand how someone can be so ****ing evil.

[reynard]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-47578798

 

Multiple fatalities in a mass shooting at a Mosque in Christchurch.

 

He live-streamed the attack on facebook from his GoPro camera.

 

I don’t understand how someone can be so ****ing evil.

Dreadful.

Sadly I'm not surprised by this sort of evil any longer, perhaps shocked it has happened in New Zealand.

Just hope it isn't as bad as it appears to be.

[ozleicester]

Huge turn out for Climate Change School Kid Protests in Oz

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-15/students-walk-out-of-class-to-protest-climate-change/10901978

[WigstonWanderer]

1 hour ago, reynard said:

Dreadful.

Sadly I'm not surprised by this sort of evil any longer, perhaps shocked it has happened in New Zealand.

Just hope it isn't as bad as it appears to be.

40 dead!

[Buce]

37 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

Huge turn out for Climate Change School Kid Protests in Oz

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-15/students-walk-out-of-class-to-protest-climate-change/10901978

 

I'm proud to say my daughter is joining the protest today.

[ozleicester]

15 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I'm proud to say my daughter is joining the protest today.

As you should be!

 

Prior to the shooting.. this was such a positive day, so much hope in our young folk

[Buce]

David Steel suspended by Lib Dems over Cyril Smith remarks

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47573243

 

"I assumed the allegations were true... but it was before he became an MP - it nothing to do with me"

[davieG]

Five Labour MPs have quit party roles to defy orders and vote against holding a fresh Brexit referendum.

Labour ordered its MPs to abstain on a cross-party bid to delay Brexit to allow a referendum on backing whatever deal is agreed or remaining in the EU.

But 41 of its MPs rebelled, with 24 supporting a referendum and 17 voting to oppose one.

Stephanie Peacock quit as a whip, saying she had been elected to honour the 2016 referendum result.

In her letter to Jeremy Corbyn she wrote: "The people of Barnsley elected me to honour that promise and that is what I did tonight.

"I felt in all good conscience I had to vote tonight to clearly rule out any form of second referendum. I believe the people spoke in 2016 and we need to enact their decision."

Her Labour colleague Ruth Smeeth, MP for Stoke-on-Trent North, quit as parliamentary private secretary to Labour's deputy leader Tom Watson - saying it was a "difficult decision but I have a duty to support the will of my constituents".

She wrote: "We need to leave and leave with a deal that works for the Potteries."

Shadow housing minister Yvonne Fovargue, shadow education minister Emma Lewell-Buck, and shadow business minister Justin Madders, also quit their roles to oppose a referendum.

Mr Corbyn thanked them for their service adding: "I understand the difficulties MPs have felt representing the views of their constituents during this process."

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Buce said:

 

I think you're misinterpreting this, actually.

 

From comments that I've seen, parents are not against it per se, they are against it for primary school children on the grounds that it is not age appropriate. Personally, I have a certain amount of sympathy for that viewpoint.

 

It's also worth pointing out that this is not solely a Muslim thing (though it is being used as a stick to beat them with by people with a certain agenda), there are also Christian parents involved in the protest. Also, this issue isn't new or restricted to this school - In London, Hassidic Jews have been threatening to remove their children from school if the schools are forced to teach LGBT lessons at high school.

 

Don't come back in here talking sense.

[Foxxed]

One day May is going to raffle Brexit away at a village fête. "Brexit? Brexit? Oh I'm sorry. I accidentally gave that away. Did you want it? Could be anywhere now. On some old lady's mantlepiece now, no doubt. Right... let's talk about knife crime in London...".

[PloTok]

38 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

One day May is going to raffle Brexit away at a village fête. 

She's trying to sell it to the DUP as we speak (well, type)

[String fellow]

Fans of adult sites will soon by denied access unless they can prove they're 18 or over, using a credit card. Is this the UK government's first big move towards web censorship, and if so, what's the real reason why they've seen fit to introduce it? Maybe it'll result in VPNs becoming more popular, which could potentially bring a new set of dangers.

[yorkie1999]

23 minutes ago, String fellow said:

Fans of adult sites will soon by denied access unless they can prove they're 18 or over, using a credit card. Is this the UK government's first big move towards web censorship, and if so, what's the real reason why they've seen fit to introduce it? Maybe it'll result in VPNs becoming more popular, which could potentially bring a new set of dangers.

Queue every parents credit cards going missing.

[Vlad the Fox]

5 hours ago, String fellow said:

Fans of adult sites will soon by denied access unless they can prove they're 18 or over, using a credit card. Is this the UK government's first big move towards web censorship, and if so, what's the real reason why they've seen fit to introduce it? Maybe it'll result in VPNs becoming more popular, which could potentially bring a new set of dangers.

Back to the good old days of breaking into building sites and raiding JCB cabs then. 

 

er...

 

 

like my friends used to, of course.

 

[WigstonWanderer]

5 hours ago, String fellow said:

Fans of adult sites will soon by denied access unless they can prove they're 18 or over, using a credit card. Is this the UK government's first big move towards web censorship, and if so, what's the real reason why they've seen fit to introduce it? Maybe it'll result in VPNs becoming more popular, which could potentially bring a new set of dangers.

Getting a whole bunch of people to hand over credit card details to a load of dodgy porn sites seems like a bad idea

[String fellow]

Yes, I agree, which is why I think VPNs are the way forward for anyone who likes 'art'.

[Strokes]

9 hours ago, String fellow said:

Yes, I agree, which is why I think VPNs are the way forward for anyone who likes 'art'.

I have to use VPNs anyway because of the kid firewall on my system. I even have to use it for social media. 

Makes no odds to me but the whole thing is a bit nanny state for my liking.