Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Bentley Bullet on July 06, 2019, 11:06:10 am
-
Right, which Labour member do people want to lead the opposition after the next general election?
-
Screaming Lord Sutch. Oh sorry, he's dead. Pity, he'd have been better than the shower of sh*t on that list.
Yeah, I know he wasn't a Labour member, but there's not much difference nowadays between them and the Monster Raving Loony Party.
-
The man who should have got the job long ago
David Milliband
-
Jeremy Corbyn is a fine leader, the right wing media,and the BBC are doing their level best,to keep him out of power, that includes the Blairite MPs, don't believe all you read, look for yourselves, Anti semitism was never mentioned, before he became leader, he his a fine honest,principled person
-
Let me get this right.
Blairite MPs are doing their level best to keep him out of power?
Since there is no possibility of Corbyn being replaced as Labour leader, your logic means that Labour MPs are doing their level best to lose the next election. Which means that some of them must be doing their level best to lose their own seats.
Give me f**king strength.
Go and look at the opinion polls. Look at when Labour's vote has collapsed and who it's gone to and then think why that has happened.
It's got f**k all to do with anti-Semitism. It's got f**k all to do with Blairite MPs.
It's all about the only game in town. Brexit. And Corbyn's Brecit policy has cost Labour 4-6million supporters over the past 6 months. And they have nearly all gone to the LDs and Greens.
Stop doing the easy thing - blaming everyone else. Start doing the hard thinking if you really want a Labour Govt.
-
Billy, I think more have gone to the Brexit party mate than those two,or is it your wishful thinking.
-
Billy, I think more have gone to the Brexit party mate than those two,or is it your wishful thinking.
The growth in Brexit Party votes matches the votes the Tories have lost.
If, as you say, its lots of Labour supporters that have voted Brexit Party - where have the Tories gone to?
-
Selby.
No. It's not wishful thinking. It's carefully looking at the polling evidence.
What do you base your opinion on?
-
The number of people I know who have always voted Labour but are going to vote Brexit Party if there is an election.
As Caroline Flint said on the Marr show 26 labour MP's in the Labour heartlands in the midlands and Yorkshire know they will lose to Farage if an election follows a failure to deliver Brexit, and that is just two areas.
He will tear both the conservatives and the Labour vote apart, and he will have had time to get organised, and parliament will give him all the ammunition he needs in the next few months by tearing itself apart, and he can stand back pointing the finger, while both main parties at the moment blame each other publicly rubbishing each other and doing half his job for him.
If he does not get an outright majority he could still hold the balance of power and join in a coalition with the Tories, who will do anything to stay in power.
-
Selby.
That's all anecdotal. There's a wide world outside your circle of friends.
Polls are infallible but if a lot of them are saying broadly the same thing, they are likely to be broadly right.
So here's what the polls say.
In late December, in a YouGov Poll, the voting intention figures were.
Con 41
Lab 39
LD 7
SNP 4
UKIP 4
Green 3
In the most recent YG poll the figures are
Con 24
Lab 18
LD 20
SNP 4
UKIP 0
Green 9
Brexit 23
So. Lab are down 21. LD and Green combined are up 19
Con+UKIP are down 21. BP are up 23.
That's a compelling argument that most of Labour's vote has gone to LD/Green and most of the Con/UKIP vote has gone to BP.
But there's more compelling data.
In the late 2018 poll, the people who said they'd voted Labour in 2017 broke like this
Lab 66
Con 4
LD 4
Green 3
UKIP 2
In the most recent poll, the figures are
Lab 43
Con 3
LD 28
Green 15
BP 10
UKIP 0
See that?
43% of the people who voted Labour in 2017 now support LD or Green. Only 10% now support BP.
You may know a lot of people who did vote Labour and are now Farageists. But those are the exception, not the rule. For every 2 of them, there are 9 other people who have left Labour and gone to an avowedly Remain-supporting party.
-
So Joan Ryan who is clearly seen and heard on tape accepting, money from the Israeli Embassy to undermine Corbyn and get others to do so, this BBC Hatchet job that's aired on Wednesday,is before Jennie Formby took over as General secretary, when I was helping in the Peterborough by election, most people where concerned about, schools, police, education and the NHS not BREXIT,
-
So Joan Ryan who is clearly seen and heard on tape accepting, money from the Israeli Embassy to undermine Corbyn and get others to do so, this BBC Hatchet job that's aired on Wednesday,is before Jennie Formby took over as General secretary, when I was helping in the Peterborough by election, most people where concerned about, schools, police, education and the NHS not BREXIT,
Not really sure what is being said in that post.
A bit rambling.
-
Swift you are showing the signs that I see all the time with the majority of hard left supporters..No matter what happens,no matter how bad it's going,it's always somebody else's fault..They are incapable of any kind of acceptance that the problem lies within their own party..
But the reality is this.Frankly at the best of times it's a tough ask to get the nation to elect Corbyn but with his brexit policy (and I say that loosely because 3 years on nobody still doesn't know what that is) Corbyn is a busted unelectable leader and Labours only chance in the next election is not coming up with a policy now,it's to late for trust to return, but to change him...
-
Exactly Wing Co. And actually they should listen to people like us as we are they people they need to convince to win a general election.
I am fed up with the Tories but are Labour the alternative for me? No, not at all. If the Tories do sort theirselves out Labour will get trounced.
-
WingCo/BFYP.
This. In spades.
It was ever this with the hard Left. Always, ALWAYS everyone else to blame.
They hate Blair but they never stop to consider for a moment where Blair emerged from. He came out of the shattered pieces of the Labour party the last time the Hard Left made it utterly unelectable.
It is beyond belief that, faced with the biggest national crisis since WWII and the worst Govt since WWI, Labour are performing worse than they have done since George V was king. And that a leader who has the worst polling figures of any Leader of the Opposition EVER (worse than Foot: worse than IDS) is utterly untouchable.
Because it is always somebody else's fault.
-
Say what you like about the Tories, but they don't muck about wringing their hands if they've got a leader who's damaging their chances of winning an election.
-
Finally.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/corbyn-to-back-second-brexit-referendu_uk_5d2392b3e4b0cf2ac68b6eb5/
Now it gets interesting...
-
Big announcement expected on Wednesday - I wonder what that might concern?
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1148286296844099584
-
Question now is: is it too late?
So many have switched allegiance to the LDs that the LDs are looking like a serious electoral force again. So it's not a given that all those will return. And, if Corbyn doesn't come out all guns blazing for this policy, but goes into that idiotic mode he took on in 2016, they might not believe him anyway.
-
Billy posted on TULO Labour.org.uk details on there, looks like a bit of sitting on the fence and a lot of If's to me.
TULO Brexit position 8th July2019 final text
-
Question now is: is it too late?
So many have switched allegiance to the LDs that the LDs are looking like a serious electoral force again. So it's not a given that all those will return. And, if Corbyn doesn't come out all guns blazing for this policy, but goes into that idiotic mode he took on in 2016, they might not believe him anyway.
Lib Dem's are only a "serious electoral force" so far as BREXIT is concerned. They are a one trick pony (like UKIP and now the BREXIT party). LD will do anything to grasp a bit of power (see Coalition govt and sacrificing their manifesto pledges).
Anecdotal or not, the remain argument have lost... divided themselves, failed to reach a consensus in their plan to subvert the largest democratic mandate ever seen.....and in a GE will be dominated by the BREXIT party.
-
Question now is: is it too late?
So many have switched allegiance to the LDs that the LDs are looking like a serious electoral force again. So it's not a given that all those will return. And, if Corbyn doesn't come out all guns blazing for this policy, but goes into that idiotic mode he took on in 2016, they might not believe him anyway.
Lib Dem's are only a "serious electoral force" so far as BREXIT is concerned. They are a one trick pony (like UKIP and now the BREXIT party). LD will do anything to grasp a bit of power (see Coalition govt and sacrificing their manifesto pledges).
Anecdotal or not, the remain argument have lost... divided themselves, failed to reach a consensus in their plan to subvert the largest democratic mandate ever seen.....and in a GE will be dominated by the BREXIT party.
I think that you will find that the majority to remain in the EEC in the 70s was far greater than this referendum.
-
Question now is: is it too late?
So many have switched allegiance to the LDs that the LDs are looking like a serious electoral force again. So it's not a given that all those will return. And, if Corbyn doesn't come out all guns blazing for this policy, but goes into that idiotic mode he took on in 2016, they might not believe him anyway.
Lib Dem's are only a "serious electoral force" so far as BREXIT is concerned. They are a one trick pony (like UKIP and now the BREXIT party). LD will do anything to grasp a bit of power (see Coalition govt and sacrificing their manifesto pledges).
Anecdotal or not, the remain argument have lost... divided themselves, failed to reach a consensus in their plan to subvert the largest democratic mandate ever seen.....and in a GE will be dominated by the BREXIT party.
I think that you will find that the majority to remain in the EEC in the 70s was far greater than this referendum.
I stand corrected.
My statement should have read, the highest number of voters for a single referendum choice ever. More people voted Leave than voted Yes to the EEC.
Although a Leave voter, I'm under little illusion of it actually happening.
-
Sorry SouthStandFan you are right. I meant the far bigger percentage previously as opposed to narrow margin in the last referendum.
I too voted leave but in three years I haven't seen or heard anyone say or do anything to give confidence of achieving it in any acceptable shape or form.
That is why I would now vote remain. The EU isn't perfect by any means but leaving our politicians in sole control of trade deals seems like letting toddlers out near a busy road unsupervised.
-
On second reading I don't think I do stand corrected. I said mandate, not majority. In terms of mandate, that was bigger than the EEC vote. So I reckon I was right. I retract my previous back down!
And... I've just seen your reply... Looks like we're arguing in agreement lol. :lol:
-
The 17.4 million votes to leave the EU in 2016 was the largest mandate for anything in British political history.
-
There is still a bit of fine tuning to do but with the unions and labour finally starting to see the light and the dangers of any form of brexit with or without blunderboris writ large I think will see the collapse of the little britain argument.
The total failure of the tories to get any form of brexit through the gate has given British industry, farmers and the general population the time to see what brexit will look like and it's fairly obvious that it's not good.
If I had a welding/fabricating business or similar and I had been reading and watching how many hundreds of larger businesses have or were planning to move across the channel then I would be very concerned about how I was going to fill my order book for the coming year.
Cue for the shrill argument we wuz robbed, except that anything that follows will be legitimate also.
-
But, as I'm getting tired of saying, interpreting a "win" of less than 4% (and I'm not even going to go into the manifest problems with that vote) as a "mandate" for anything but the very softest of Brexits was bound to lead to the divisions we now have.
May chose to interpret a wafer-thin majority as a mandate for a very hard Brexit. She did that entirely for party political reasons. She compounded that error by (after two years of talking up Hard Brexit) then agreeing a deal that was an utter dogs breakfast.
Had she been putting the country first, rather than playing party politics, she'd have realised that a 51.9-48.1 split demands that you find a gentle compromise. A deal which took us out of the political structures of the EU, but left us in the CU and SM would not have been the first choice of many, but it would have been an acceptable compromise to a majority. We saw that in a recent poll.
She could have done that. We could have moved on.
But she didn't. And now we are where we are. The chance of a grown up compromise has been pissed away.
So we are faced with extreme outcomes. And, to be frank, I don't care what people on the Leave side are now claiming about "democracy". There never was and there isn't now a majority wanting the sort of No Deal Brexit that we're now facing. So, if the choice is between that and No Brexit, it's an easy choice for me. And if the older generation go to their grave chuntering about democracy being subverted, frankly, who cares?
-
what I find strange bst is you want what’s best for the U.k yet you want the party you will vote for to change there manifesto just to win a general election you want to win at all costs
-
Question now is: is it too late?
So many have switched allegiance to the LDs that the LDs are looking like a serious electoral force again. So it's not a given that all those will return. And, if Corbyn doesn't come out all guns blazing for this policy, but goes into that idiotic mode he took on in 2016, they might not believe him anyway.
Lib Dem's are only a "serious electoral force" so far as BREXIT is concerned. They are a one trick pony (like UKIP and now the BREXIT party). LD will do anything to grasp a bit of power (see Coalition govt and sacrificing their manifesto pledges).
Anecdotal or not, the remain argument have lost... divided themselves, failed to reach a consensus in their plan to subvert the largest democratic mandate ever seen.....and in a GE will be dominated by the BREXIT party.
I think that you will find that the majority to remain in the EEC in the 70s was far greater than this referendum.
I stand corrected.
My statement should have read, the highest number of voters for a single referendum choice ever. More people voted Leave than voted Yes to the EEC.
Although a Leave voter, I'm under little illusion of it actually happening.
Yes as I have said (perhaps the only thing I have ever said on here) quite a few times when we had the 1975 Referendum on continuing in the EEC (after a couple of trial years in it) we voted by 66% to 34% to "join" full time ... 17,378,581 voted Join
That was an overwhelming 32 % MAJORITY to join. Predictably I voted Leave so was on the wrong horse that time as well !
There was no great outcry from the losing side (I suppose 'cos it was such a hammering) and the only dissentors were people within the Tory Party (mainly) who without compunction have steadily and sometimes not subtely chipped away against that the desires of that "overwhelming" majority - which was THEN "the will of the people" with no great outcry or demand from the public that I could detect.
And yet THEY have the nerve to talk about the death of democracy if we now backtrack on the 2016 Result having subverted the 75 result behind the scenes
Yes once again I agree 1975 was a long time ago - true - but 32% was still roughly nearly 10 times the majority produced in the 2016 Referendum when I was predictably on the wrong Horse again
Note to self : If there is another Referendum (on any topic) think which way you want the Vote to go and vote for the opposite outcome :clapping:
-
People (including me originally) are confusing a mandate with a majority.
The Withdrawal Agreement is the closest thing to a compromise, but noone WILL compromise. Personally I'd be happy to remain in the current trade agreement, but that comes with freedom of movement which I personally wouldn't compromise on, and the EU wouldn't separate the four freedoms.
I don't agree that the UK (or any country) should be a net contributor to the EU. With the exception of reasonable running costs it should be cost neutral.
The vote in the 70s was for economics, not an agreement to merge nations, societies, militaries, minutiae legislation, etc etc. That's what I don't like about the EU, they have far too much influence over elements of the UK that they have no business being involved in.
I don't fit your purported Brexit voter demographic of being old and uneducated. I'm mid 30s, so a pure millennial, degree educated (good subject, crap uni lol). So the argument of Brexit voters dying off is not as relevant as Remain voters think. Look to the MEP elections recently for an indication of how a GE would go. Split again for all intents and purposes.
-
People (including me originally) are confusing a mandate with a majority.
The Withdrawal Agreement is the closest thing to a compromise, but noone WILL compromise. Personally I'd be happy to remain in the current trade agreement, but that comes with freedom of movement which I personally wouldn't compromise on, and the EU wouldn't separate the four freedoms.
I don't agree that the UK (or any country) should be a net contributor to the EU. With the exception of reasonable running costs it should be cost neutral.
The vote in the 70s was for economics, not an agreement to merge nations, societies, militaries, minutiae legislation, etc etc. That's what I don't like about the EU, they have far too much influence over elements of the UK that they have no business being involved in.
I don't fit your purported Brexit voter demographic of being old and uneducated. I'm mid 30s, so a pure millennial, degree educated (good subject, crap uni lol). So the argument of Brexit voters dying off is not as relevant as Remain voters think. Look to the MEP elections recently for an indication of how a GE would go. Split again for all intents and purposes.
Where you say noone will compromise I assume means the tories cannot agree amongst themselves and will not compromise on anything less than no-deal with any other political party.
Why would you not want freedom of movement, the freedom to live and work anywhere within the EU borders.
''The EU has far too much influence'' if you want to be part of the wealthiest trading bloc in the world you have to give a little, having access to this market without tariffs benefits UK industry for more than many other members of the EU and we would gain far more than what it costs us pound for pound. The UK has been part of the negotiations that has resulted iin what the EU is today. Wait until any form of brexit is decided upon and then you will see what the nett cost to the UK is.
''I don't fit your purported Brexit voter demographic of being old and uneducated'' true but I'm glad you said it not me.
-
SSF
Several points in your post which you, as a bright lad, will, I think, find problematic when you read them back.
1) Economics. All economic groupings have a system for transferral of finds from the richer to the poorer. That works at local level (Council Tax takes more from wealthier families than poor ones but spends more or less equally on provisions). It works at national level where income tax is disproportionately paid by the wealthy.
The EU "tax" on countries is a tiny fraction of those amounts, but it has the same intention. Take from the richer. Give to the poorer. That isn't done for soft-headed purposes. It's done because a continent of half a billion where every region is economically successful is safer, richer and more secure than one where there are vast disparities of wealth.
I assume you know, by the way, that Doncaster is a massive net beneficiary of this process? Because we are among the poorest people in the EU.
2) Your comment on what sort of Brexit YOU want is illuminating. The fact that you have to explain it in 2019 sort of highlights the problems with the referendum in 2016. No one knew what Brexit meant. They knew what THEY, individually wanted. But that's not democracy. That's egoism.
You want proof that Brexit was an ill-determined concept? Go and Google Farage+Norway+2016. Farage relentlessly pushed Norway as a model to copy. Norway not only allows free movement of people as a price of being in the Single Market, it is actually in the Schengen area. Farage pushed that in 2016. No-one on the Leave side NOW says that's remotely acceptable.
And THAT is the overwhelming argument for Ref2. Ref2shoukd be on SPECIFIC outcomes. Not a badly defined concept that is open to manipulation.
3) YOU may be a young, graduate Brexit supporter. But you are in a very small minority. The only age group that has a majority of people supporting Brexit is over 65s. And it is an established fact (not my opinion) that there is a very strong correlation between lower educational qualifications and higher support for Brexit.
I do agree that the Remain side has a huge problem if it is not united. I've been hammering on that point to anyone in the Labour party who will listen to me for a long time.
-
what I find strange bst is you want what’s best for the U.k yet you want the party you will vote for to change there manifesto just to win a general election you want to win at all costs
Bpool.
It's very simple.
Labour have by far the best economic policies for the good of the country. And by far the best social policies.
I want a Labour Govt. For the good of the country. It stands to reason that I want Labour to present itself in the way that gives it the best chance of winning.
It just so happens that I think Labour's best chance of winning coincides with what I think is the best thing for the country on the Brexit issue too.
Your post suggests that you are looking for hypocrisy. You'll need to look elsewhere because you're not going to find it here.
-
To answer a few of these points in one post:
Labour hasn’t exactly got a laudable economic record. They say they will reduce the deficit within 5 years, but will also end austerity? How can both be achieved at our current rate of expenditure (austere).
How quickly we forget that when the Treasury changed hands Labour left a note saying there’s no money left on the desk.
People do know what they voted for. It was made explicitly clear… leave the single market, end free movement of goods, capital and services. On that basis, a democratic decision was taken (not an ego decision). I’m all for the free movement of SKILLED people, of any nationality. If we need 5000 nurses in Doncaster Hospital and 5000 Romanian nurses want to work here, get them in. Thousands of unskilled immigrants with no prospect of employment… not so much. Have you been to Hexthorpe recently? Have you attended a primary school where the majority of children can’t speak a word of English, thus holding back the minority of English speaking children (of ANY Nationality). Have you tried to get a doctor’s appointment? Have you been on a Calais ferry recently, I did in January and let me tell you there were around a hundred vagrants arriving at Dover (on just the one ferry), and yes I’m judging a book by its cover but I would bet my house they are not net contributors to the UK.
A quick walk around Doncaster town centre would show you we aren’t exactly flourishing as a town, and it has a strong correlation to when the mass influx of migration began. I want to live in a multicultural, ethnically diverse… ENGLISH town. That’s not what we’ve ended up with though is it.
Lower academic qualifications doesn’t disbar someone from a valid opinion, and arguably it’s those in trades without a required qualification/degree that are most affected by free movement of goods and services.
Would I like free movement, no not at all. If I want to move to say Italy, and I have a secure job and something to offer the Italian economy, rest assured the company would get me there… regardless of there being no free movement agreement in place. Leaving the EU will make it more of an admin burden, but won’t stop it happening. Same works for skilled people coming here. If you’ve got the skills we need, come on in. Bring your kids, bring your wife.
More likely, I’ll move out of Donny as soon as I can! Anywhere in the countryside will do. And I guarantee I’ll be a net gain to the local economy wherever I move.
-
I'm just conscious that I've taken your discussion off topic. The best hope you ever had was David Milliband and for reasons beyond me you elected his brother , who was unelectable as a PM. I think Labours current woes, and the probably next generation of opposition (or possibly not even that) can be traced back to that leadership election.
-
SSF you appear to have missed all the eveidence to show that Austerity is a manufactured program designed by tories, run by tories to benefit tories. That labour councils are fairing worst under this regime is abhorent. To give tax cuts to the highest earners so that you can then say oh my the country cannot afford to look after the poorest is shameful. Austerity doesn't help the country as a whole either as depriving those that spend all their money from week to week deflates the economy.
Labour-run areas suffer Tory cuts the most. It’s an ignored national scandal
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/12/labour-councils-suffer-tory-cuts-most-ignored-scandal
Are Labour-run councils bearing the brunt of council cuts?
https://fullfact.org/news/are-labour-run-councils-bearing-brunt-council-cuts/
''A quick walk around Doncaster town centre would show you we aren’t exactly flourishing as a town, and it has a strong correlation to when the mass influx of migration began. I want to live in a multicultural, ethnically diverse… ENGLISH town. That’s not what we’ve ended up with though is it''
Not worth an answer
-
SSF you appear to have missed all the eveidence to show that Austerity is a manufactured program designed by tories, run by tories to benefit tories. That labour councils are fairing worst under this regime is abhorent. To give tax cuts to the highest earners so that you can then say oh my the country cannot afford to look after the poorest is shameful. Austerity doesn't help the country as a whole either as depriving those that spend all their money from week to week deflates the economy.
Labour-run areas suffer Tory cuts the most. It’s an ignored national scandal
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/12/labour-councils-suffer-tory-cuts-most-ignored-scandal
Are Labour-run councils bearing the brunt of council cuts?
https://fullfact.org/news/are-labour-run-councils-bearing-brunt-council-cuts/
''A quick walk around Doncaster town centre would show you we aren’t exactly flourishing as a town, and it has a strong correlation to when the mass influx of migration began. I want to live in a multicultural, ethnically diverse… ENGLISH town. That’s not what we’ve ended up with though is it''
Not worth an answer
Nice high roading of me with your final point. Doesn't change the reality of our town though. That doesn't make me a xenophobe (or worse) but a realist.
The particular nuances of the austerity programme are not the point. The point is we need to be living an Austere fiscal programme as a country. Fact. We cannot keep spending at the rates Labour instilled.
And your ideas of high earners is probably different to mine. I see it as a lad growing up in a council house now in the high income bracket, having been encouraged by the promise of social mobility, when in reality I have more and more of my earned pay taken and those on only moderately less than me are handed it in the form of working tax credit, and in many instances are living a better or equal standard of living than me despite earning less. Unfair and frustrating.
-
I've just read through the two links you posted and I can't see how they backup your point. The FullFacts site shows that it's actually other sources of govt financing/funds that are more heavily drawn on by labour funded constituencies that is the reason they have less spending power per head, bolstered by the fact more affluent areas have higher council tax and thus an increased amount of spending power per head.
That Owen Jones tries to link it is a fallacy (false cause).
-
SSF
You're a depressing example if the way that voodoo economics has become ingrained as concrete fact in this country.
Austerity is, was and always will be economically illiterate. I haven't got time to go into the detail that I poured into here in 2010-13, but if you're really interested, you could start off by Googling The Paradox of Thrift.
-
SSF
You're a depressing example if the way that voodoo economics has become ingrained as concrete fact in this country.
Austerity is, was and always will be economically illiterate. I haven't got time to go into the detail that I poured into here in 2010-13, but if you're really interested, you could start off by Googling The Paradox of Thrift.
It's not the first time I've been described as depressing.
I certainly will Google that and have a read.
I'll bow out of this discussion now having derailed the original post (apologies).
Thank you for the debate.
-
Interesting change from Corbyn though. Not easy for him as he had to let up on one side of his narrative, IE sticking by his principles or listening to what seemingly the majority in his party want.
It will clearly harm them in terms of the points made to leave voters, though they will now hope (and polls back this up to be fair) they'll win back more pro remain types to cover it. Question is if it is far too late?
-
Too late I reckon. Does it matter though...
If Lib Dem and Labour take a lot of seats, enough to form a coalition and working majority. Then surely Brexit is off?
I don't want that. But it could happen.
-
SSF
Although you're only half my age, your views on football and politics are very similar to mine, and my degree was at a crap uni as well.
BST
How on Earth does anyone know that the majority of 17.4 million people are uneducated? has someone asked them all? because nobody asked me.
-
No problem SSF. That's an interesting read.
For clarity, I wasn't calling you depressing. I meant it's depressing how bad the debate has been in this country.
Austerity was only ever a political choice. Osborne pressed that idea as a way to beat Labour. But it is utterly debunked as a sensible economic policy.
There WERE some academic economists who supported it in 2009/10. But there work has been ripped to shreds. The most shocking mistake was a Harvard economist who supported Austerity as a way to enable economic growth but it turned out he'd added up his numbers incorrectly in an Excel spreadsheet. (I shit you not. Google Rogoff Excel.)
The bit that people struggle with is that, when an economy is depressed, cutting Govt spending doesn't help. It makes it worse. That is as thoroughly proven an economic principle as there is. And it's the reason why we've had the worst decade of economic growth for 200 years.
And the really depressing thing is that it's still taken as read in this country that Austerity a) was inevitable and b) succeeded. It wasn't and it didn't.
Hammond knows that but he's tied by a party for whom Austerity has become a religion. Because they have no other ideas.
Here's the funny thing. McDonnell knows it, and his Economic policy is what is needed to get Capitalism working again. Even though he's a Marxist!
-
The best way to stop investment in this country throughout my lifetime has been to elect a Labour government. The money people just take their money elsewhere for better returns, and unemployment goes up, and taxation for those in employment,
-
SS.
Here's one pretty unarguable piece of evidence. The data exists, broken down by council ward for:
%Leave vote
% of population who have degrees.
This is what happens when you plot one against the other.
(https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/473F/production/_93993281__eu_ref_educated_population.png)
Here's some more evidence from a large opinion poll immediately after the vote.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2016/06/27/how-britain-voted
Polls aren't perfect, but there are several that show the same results. And polling science means they don't have to ask everyone in the country to get a good idea of the general trends. In fact the fact that you point out that no one's asked you implies a degree of egoism! Which ties in with the number of Leavers who insist that since THEY know what they voted for, everyone else must have voted for the same thing...
No one is trying to pull your piece. It IS established beyond argument that Brexit supporters were disproportionately older and disproportionately of lower educational qualification level.
-
SSF
I missed out an important point earlier. The reason Austerity is such shockingly bad economics is because of the Multiplier Effect. That's another very well established economic concept.
It says that (especially when the economy is depressed) Govt spending on the economy kick starts other economic activity.
If the Govt spends £100m on new houses, that puts money in the pockets of builders. They buy stuff. That puts money in other people's pockets. Etc. Etc. The effect of this is that many, many more people than the original beneficiaries feel the positive effect. So general confidence grows and there is a virtuous circle on economic performance. So the overall economic output of the country increases by much more than the £100m that the Govt borrowed and spent.
This has a long term effect, and as a result of the higher output, the Govt collects more tax. Which, over a few years, covers the £100m the Govt borrowed and invested.
THAT'S the bit that's hard to grasp. Spending more money, in the right way REDUCES Govt debt.
This isn't rocket science. It's well-established economics. You might want to ask why the Tory party has wilfully ignored it for a decade, resulting in a horrifying loss of wealth to the country.
-
BST
That's the difference between you and me. You believe polls, stats, and data; I don't, because they can all be doctored to suit certain viewpoints and opinions.
Why do you think the Referendum and so many elections in recent years have been wrongly forecasted?
-
New ComRes Poll out today confirms the stats Billy posted earlier. Labour have lost twice as many remain voters than leave. The Tories have lost twice as many leavers than remain.
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1148624723401740290
-
No one is trying to pull your piece. It IS established beyond argument that Brexit supporters were disproportionately older and disproportionately of lower educational qualification level.
What I'm saying... as a young(er), graduate leave voter..... is that being young and having been through higher education doesn't make your vote more "correct" than another
-
SS
1) The image I posted was nothing to do with polling.
2) Yes opinion polls have margins of error. But they are generally correct to within a few percent. It's stretching credibility way beyond breaking point to think that the figures in that poll I sent you aren't broadly correct.
You know what I think? I reckon you are simply ignoring evidence that you don't want to be correct.
-
No one is trying to pull your piece. It IS established beyond argument that Brexit supporters were disproportionately older and disproportionately of lower educational qualification level.
What I'm saying... as a young(er), graduate leave voter..... is that being young and having been through higher education doesn't make your vote more "correct" than another
I agree.
-
New ComRes Poll out today confirms the stats Billy posted earlier. Labour have lost twice as many remain voters than leave. The Tories have lost twice as many leavers than remain.
https://twitter.com/LeftieStats/status/1148624723401740290
Interesting figures Wilts. Looks like Labour might be bouncing back.
Interesting thing is that in the worst polls for Labour, the lost Remain supporters were outnumbering the lost Leave voters by more like 3-4 times. That suggest that if Lab IS rebounding, it's doing so by pulling back Remain supporters from the LDs.
Let's hope so.
-
And that poll was done before todays news so we still await news what effect it will have.
As I have said before my concern is that it will attract LD voters in the wrong areas. There is no point having a bigger majority in London & Bristol if some northern leave seats will be lost. I wonder though if it might have a galvanising effect on Scottish Labour? Can they challenge the LD's there as the party or remain and remaining in the union?
-
Wilts.
I understand that concern.
But, as I've been saying, the fact that Labour held seats in the North voted Leave does not automatically mean that the majority of Labour voters in the North are Leave supporters.
This poll says that there are more working class Remain supporters among people who voted Labour in 2017 than there are working class Leave supporters.
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/1140939099538436096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1140939099538436096&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theneweuropean.co.uk%2Ftop-stories%2Fyougov-on-labour-voters-1-6112720
It's bizarre that, egged on by the likes of Mann and Flint, Labour have been told that their policy must pander to that small fraction of Labour's support. While ignoring the haemorrhaging of support among the much larger pool of both working and middle class Remain supporters.
-
By the way Wilts. That ComRes poll.
This shows the extent of Labour's ongoing problem once Boris is PM.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ComRes/status/1148540233430048768
-
It's a bigger lead with yougov
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1148555274879414273
But 'neither' is well ahead here
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1148581977160867845
-
It's quite clear that YouGov have a different way of crunching the numbers to Opinium and ComRes, that is giving bigger predictions for how many Lab supporters have gone to LD. We'll not know which one is right until an election, but it's clear that Labour has a hell of a job to catch up with a Johnson-led Tory party.
-
The best way to stop investment in this country throughout my lifetime has been to elect a Labour government. The money people just take their money elsewhere for better returns, and unemployment goes up, and taxation for those in employment,
Some reading for you while you walk the dog Selby
FactCheck Q&A: Which party has a better track record on the economy?
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-which-party-has-a-better-track-record-on-the-economy
-
SSF, I'm posting this cos it makes a better fist of it than I can.
''Three years on, we’ve still not answered the question: what has the EU done for us?''
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/10/question-eu-done-european-funding-britain-local-area
-
If our net contributions every year is more than the money returned for us to spend on investments, How are the EU doing anything for us? they are only returning some of our money for us to invest in ourselves.
Most of the members get more back than they contribute,known in other circles as a ponzie system.
-
Selby
No. It's not a Ponzi scheme. It's nothing remotely like a Ponzi scheme. That's based on the premise that you pay inflated returns to a small number of people by bringing in many more new investors. And the whole thing breaks down because the number of new investors you need to feed the earlier ones grows exponentially.
So that's possibly the worst analogy for the EU I've ever seen.
Onto the substantive point, the reason we get back FAR more than we put in is that the EU has done a superb job of bringing up basket case countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland, the whole of Eastern Europe) to a much higher level of economic performance. That has led to the richest and most open market in human history. And we all benefit from being able to trade freely with that market. The benefits that we get from that massively outweigh the 0.4% of GDP that is our net contribution to the EU.
-
If our net contributions every year is more than the money returned for us to spend on investments, How are the EU doing anything for us? they are only returning some of our money for us to invest in ourselves.
Most of the members get more back than they contribute,known in other circles as a ponzie system.
The UK earns far more money just from being in the Single Market than the cost of the subs to be in it.
-
Onto the substantive point, the reason we get back FAR more than we put in is that the EU has done a superb job of bringing up basket case countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland, the whole of Eastern Europe) to a much higher level of economic performance. That has led to the richest and most open market in human history. And we all benefit from being able to trade freely with that market. The benefits that we get from that massively outweigh the 0.4% of GDP that is our net contribution to the EU.
Spain's debt to GDP ratio has doubled since the introduction of the Euro.
Romania's debt has doubled since joining the EU.
Ask a Greek what they think of the EU!
Unemployment rose drastically across the euro zone and is now only getting back to reasonable levels.
Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way?
-
Onto the substantive point, the reason we get back FAR more than we put in is that the EU has done a superb job of bringing up basket case countries (Spain, Portugal, Ireland, the whole of Eastern Europe) to a much higher level of economic performance. That has led to the richest and most open market in human history. And we all benefit from being able to trade freely with that market. The benefits that we get from that massively outweigh the 0.4% of GDP that is our net contribution to the EU.
Spain's debt to GDP ratio has doubled since the introduction of the Euro.
Romania's debt has doubled since joining the EU.
Ask a Greek what they think of the EU!
Unemployment rose drastically across the euro zone and is now only getting back to reasonable levels.
Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way?
The amount of money the UK saves by not being at war with any country within the boundaries and the cost saving of being part of this group which makes it a daunting option for any thinking of starting one inside or out is worthy of the membership fees alone. It's like being a member of a Super-Amazon-Prime with reduced delivery fees and charges and anyone that thinks we could possibly improve our fiscal position by leaving needs to invest in a good psychiatrist. So SSF it's your turn to tell us what any of those advantages will be, noone else has managed to do it so far on this forum or in the government, go ahead knock yourself out.
-
Ok.
I recommend a great book called Factfulness by Hans Rosling. The fastest developing economies and living standards across the world are in Africa and S America. The buying power of sub Saharan Africa is immense, noting they have also just signed a trade agreement across all African nations.
It is predicted by the UN that over the next 50 years these continents will become the new superpowers.
The EU trade bloc will continue to decline into irrelevance.
We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.
We've made our bed. We now need to get out of it and make one with a more attractive , younger partner. So to speak.
-
I also don't believe for a second we'd be at war with any European nation if we weren't in the EU. In fact, by their relentless eastward expansion you could argue they have only antogonised Russia (without major benefit to the EU). Trying to become the new NATO is pointless.
On the security side, militarily we exchange far more information with 5 eyes partners (UK US AUS CAN NZ) than we do with EU nations.
As for the police side. If we had proper border checks (which are currently a farce), we wouldn't be so reliant on information sharing on potential terror risks coming in.
So basically, withdraw from the EU, concentrate on a strategic (50 year) plan of investment in Africa and S America, bring our commonwealth partners along for the ride. Prosper.
Vote SSF!
-
Africa and South America are perhaps some of the greatest areas for growth, but none would hold a candle to the EU. This of course doesn't answer the big question, what are the fiscal advantages of leaving the EU.
-
Not perhaps.
Africa alone has more than 3 times the amount of people in the EU.
The fiscal advantage is strategic, not short term. So I can't say, in 2023 each household will be XXX pounds better off. It doesnt work like that.
I'm talking about backing the right horses over the next century.
-
Additionally. We've tried the EU for 40 odd years, and it turns out the majority of people (who bothered to vote) dont like it.
Is it so unpalatable that we give it a go outside of the EU, for 40 odd years, and see how we get on?
-
Additionally. We've tried the EU for 40 odd years, and it turns out the majority of people (who bothered to vote) dont like it.
Is it so unpalatable that we give it a go outside of the EU, for 40 odd years, and see how we get on?
Still not answering the question then? and the problem is that the public were sold a bunch of outright lies either directly by the likes of johnson or unknowingly via fb by farage and banks.
-
I've answered the question twice. Not sure what else you want? Maybe you're not listening, which seems to be an inherent Remain trait
-
I've never used FB so I wouldn't know about that
-
I've answered the question twice. Not sure what else you want? Maybe you're not listening, which seems to be an inherent Remain trait
Have you considered a career in politics, a really simple question, what are the fiscal advantages of the UK leaving the EU? not what other countries are doing, not about recommended reading, not who voted what when or why, not about who made the bed, just plain and simple, what are the fiscal advantages of the UK leaving the EU? please.
-
The ability to legally seperate ourselves from a failing superstate project which has brought high GDP ratio debt across the bloc.
The ability to avoid being a net contributor to a group which benefits less developed countries and not our own citizens.
The ability to influence and harness new relationships with the rising economic powers of the world, avoiding the self interest protectionism of the EU bloc.
I of course can't give you figures as I've stated. If you're looking for me to say X billions to the NHS you won't get it, because it's incalculable.
I have actually tried to actively involve myself in local politics but found that the only input I was asked for was money! I was a Tory member for a while but again all they want is money not opinion or wider engagement.
-
Ok.
I recommend a great book called Factfulness by Hans Rosling. The fastest developing economies and living standards across the world are in Africa and S America. The buying power of sub Saharan Africa is immense, noting they have also just signed a trade agreement across all African nations.
It is predicted by the UN that over the next 50 years these continents will become the new superpowers.
The EU trade bloc will continue to decline into irrelevance.
We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.
We've made our bed. We now need to get out of it and make one with a more attractive , younger partner. So to speak.
Something rather like the EU, is that?
-
The ability to legally seperate ourselves from a failing superstate project which has brought high GDP ratio debt across the bloc.
The ability to avoid being a net contributor to a group which benefits less developed countries and not our own citizens.
The ability to influence and harness new relationships with the rising economic powers of the world, avoiding the self interest protectionism of the EU bloc.
I of course can't give you figures as I've stated. If you're looking for me to say X billions to the NHS you won't get it, because it's incalculable.
I have actually tried to actively involve myself in local politics but found that the only input I was asked for was money! I was a Tory member for a while but again all they want is money not opinion or wider engagement.
Thanks for your reply SSF.
Does your assessment of being a net contributor take into consideration of what the new costs will be in tariffs and the added border & customs costs will be for us to trade with the EU and countries further afield should we leave.
Further to this helping these developing countries within the EU consolidates future stability of the region and shows the world that we care not just about ourselves but countries worse off than ourselves and that we have moved on from being a military empire. The EU is not limited to the countries that are members at present and the more countries that join the greater the benefits for all.
We can still trade with emerging nations via the EU and would have more bargaining power.
The figure may be incalculable but almost to a person economists across the world agree that the UK will be worse off financially.
I'm sorry you were treated so shabbily by the conservative party but at least you understand how they treat everyone else in the country not in their inner circle.
-
SSF
It's odd that you focus on Govt debt. That kind of reinforces the point I was making about how that one issue has dominated the discussion in the UK.
You could have noted that Spain's GDP has increased almost 10 fold since it joined the EU.
Or that Romania's GDP has more than doubled in a decade since it joined the EU.
You talk about trade with Africa.
1) Africa's current GDP is less than 1/9th that of the EU.
2) Yes they are growing more quickly than EU countries (or the USA or Japan or Canada etc...) but that's what less developed countries do. If they grew at 5% more than the EU per year for 50 years (they won't, growth rates drop as development increases) it would be 50 years before they had the same GDP as the EU. So why on earth make it significantly harder to trade with the EU now?
3) In any case, we CAN trade with Africa from inside the EU...
4) There is a massive positive point about the EU that no Leaver ever addresses. The way in which, by tying countries together, it reinforces democracy and peace in the most dangerous region on earth.
Within living memory, the following countries have been invaded, invaded others, had civil wars or lived under military dictatorships.
UK
France
Luxembourg.
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Portugal
Italy
Czechia
Slovakia
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Germany
Poland
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Hungary
Slovenia
Croatia
Greece
Bulgaria
Romania
Hungary
Malta
Cyprus
That happened within living memory. Within. Living. Memory.
The EU is a major part in why it is currently inconceivable that could happen again in the mid-future.
And don't say..but NATO.
NATO didn't stop civil war in Northern Ireland, Slovenia, Croatia and Cyprus.
It didn't prevent fascist military dictatorships in Greece, Portugal and Spain.
But there has never been a civil war in an EU member state. Never been an overthrowing of democracy in an EU member state.
Just ponder that. And think whether you just take for granted a stability that our parents and grandparents dreamed of.
-
Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way?
We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.
I am afraid SSF you may find those two points of view contradictory (or mutually incompatable).
What might the demands from the emerging markets be on their side of a trade deal? Talks between the UK & India have faltered because one of India's main demands is greater economic migration (more visas) for Indians to the UK.
https://www.ft.com/content/56074dda-95bd-11e9-8cfb-30c211dcd229
-
SSF
It's odd that you focus on Govt debt. That kind of reinforces the point I was making about how that one issue has dominated the discussion in the UK.
You could have noted that Spain's GDP has increased almost 10 fold since it joined the EU.
Or that Romania's GDP has more than doubled in a decade since it joined the EU.
You talk about trade with Africa.
1) Africa's current GDP is less than 1/9th that of the EU.
2) Yes they are growing more quickly than EU countries (or the USA or Japan or Canada etc...) but that's what less developed countries do. If they grew at 5% more than the EU per year for 50 years (they won't, growth rates drop as development increases) it would be 50 years before they had the same GDP as the EU. So why on earth make it significantly harder to trade with the EU now?
3) In any case, we CAN trade with Africa from inside the EU...
4) There is a massive positive point about the EU that no Leaver ever addresses. The way in which, by tying countries together, it reinforces democracy and peace in the most dangerous region on earth.
Within living memory, the following countries have been invaded, invaded others, had civil wars or lived under military dictatorships.
UK
France
Luxembourg.
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Portugal
Italy
Czechia
Slovakia
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Germany
Poland
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Hungary
Slovenia
Croatia
Greece
Bulgaria
Romania
Hungary
Malta
Cyprus
That happened within living memory. Within. Living. Memory.
The EU is a major part in why it is currently inconceivable that could happen again in the mid-future.
And don't say..but NATO.
NATO didn't stop civil war in Northern Ireland, Slovenia, Croatia and Cyprus.
It didn't prevent fascist military dictatorships in Greece, Portugal and Spain.
But there has never been a civil war in an EU member state. Never been an overthrowing of democracy in an EU member state.
Just ponder that. And think whether you just take for granted a stability that our parents and grandparents dreamed of.
Having served the country in some genuinely unstable regions I can assure you I don't take stability for granted.
Can you honestly say the EU is the most dangerous region on earth? Really?
-
Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way?
We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.
I am afraid SSF you may find those two points of view contradictory (or mutually incompatable).
What might the demands from the emerging markets be on their side of a trade deal? Talks between the UK & India have faltered because one of India's main demands is greater economic migration (more visas) for Indians to the UK.
https://www.ft.com/content/56074dda-95bd-11e9-8cfb-30c211dcd229
I can see the possible contradiction but I'm not suggesting we prop up African social structures and governments ,as we do with other EU countries. I'm suggesting at the current rate of change, that in 50+ years it will be Europeans desperately trying to migrate to Africa as the emerging economy of the world.
Why shouldn't Indians have more access to the UK? Why should Latvians be given precendence for example. Was India not part of the Empire?
All the remain arguments in this thread are valid and I'm not dismissing them. Both sides of the argument are highly unlikely to down tools and say "you're right, you've convinced me".
I appreciate I could be more educated about it, but I think I've done more research than your stereotypical Leave voter and remain steadfast that we should get out and seek our prosperity without the shackles of our continental neighbours.
We are being dragged down to the lowest common denominators of the EU when in fact we are operating as a country at a level above many of them. The EU is a system of averaging, when we should be taking advantage of our individual strengths. By Remaining I see it as indulging mediocrity.
-
SSF
Of course Europe is the most dangerous place on earth. Historically there is absolutely nowhere on earth that had unleashed and endured the carnage that has been self inflicted on Europe (UK very much included). That carnage has almost entirely been down to competing nationalisms. As I've said times many on here, between 100BC and 1945, a major army crossed the Rhine to do battle once every 37 years. Find another place on earth with a record like that.
The greatest wars in history have all been mainly or entirely fought in Europe.
WWI, WWII, the Thirty Years War, the Wars of the French Revolution/Napoleonic Wars and the War of Spanish Succession are unmatched anywhere in the world for the scale of devastation. Each of those killed 0.5-2.5% of the entire world population.
Europe increasingly HASN'T been the most dangerous place on earth for the past 60 years. If you think the basic rivalries that produced those carnage's have gone, you're in cloud cuckoo land. They haven't gone. They've been controlled. THAT was the founding purpose of the EEC/EC/EU. To force structures into being that made it bleeding obvious that you gained more by co-operating than by fighting.
Have a look at the list of conflicts in the territories of EU countries in the 100 years before they became EU countries. I posted this list a few months ago.
Wars of Italian Unification
Wars of German Unification
Franco-Prussian War
1st, 2nd and 3rd Balkan Wars
WWI
Estonian War of Independence
Allies involvement in the Russian Civil War
Polish War of Independence
Lithuanian War of Independence
Latvia War of Independence
Polish-Lithuanian War
Polish-Soviet War
Hungarian-Romanian War
Greco-Turkish War
Czechoslovak-Hungarian War
Irish War of Independence
Spanish Civil War
WWII
Greek Civil War
Irish Troubles
Basque Troubles
Cypriot Civil War
Yugoslavian Civil War.
Notice a pattern?
Every single conflict commenced before the protagonists were members of the EU. Not one single conflict in Europe has ever been started by or in a country that is a member of the EU.
If you want to have a look, you'll find a similar story about revolutions and military coups.
I'll be blunt here because this is too important not to be. You have grown up in a very unusual period when Europe has had peace imposed on it, to a great extent by the success of the EU. You clearly assume it is inevitable that Europe should be peaceful. That is dangerously wrong. Europe is and always has been a powder keg.
That alone is reason enough for staying in and supporting the EU.
-
Non-EU member state migrants numbering almost half of Ireland's population settled in the EU in 2017 alone. That's not asylum seekers fleeing war, its economic migrants and their dependants. In fact 70 percent of those arriving are not refugees. Under what moral, ethical or humanitarian basis should my money be used to assist those people in any way?
We should invest in Africa and S America and build trading relationships there as that's where the future is. In 50 years time we (Europeans) will be seen as the third world in comparison if current rates of change are maintained.
I am afraid SSF you may find those two points of view contradictory (or mutually incompatable).
What might the demands from the emerging markets be on their side of a trade deal? Talks between the UK & India have faltered because one of India's main demands is greater economic migration (more visas) for Indians to the UK.
https://www.ft.com/content/56074dda-95bd-11e9-8cfb-30c211dcd229
I can see the possible contradiction but I'm not suggesting we prop up African social structures and governments ,as we do with other EU countries. I'm suggesting at the current rate of change, that in 50+ years it will be Europeans desperately trying to migrate to Africa as the emerging economy of the world.
Why shouldn't Indians have more access to the UK? Why should Latvians be given precendence for example. Was India not part of the Empire?
All the remain arguments in this thread are valid and I'm not dismissing them. Both sides of the argument are highly unlikely to down tools and say "you're right, you've convinced me".
I appreciate I could be more educated about it, but I think I've done more research than your stereotypical Leave voter and remain steadfast that we should get out and seek our prosperity without the shackles of our continental neighbours.
We are being dragged down to the lowest common denominators of the EU when in fact we are operating as a country at a level above many of them. The EU is a system of averaging, when we should be taking advantage of our individual strengths. By Remaining I see it as indulging mediocrity.
So lets be clear about this, apart from vague statements about emerging nations and how you were treated badly by your own party there has been nothing from you that states the case for a fiscal improvement for the UK if and when Brexit occurs, nothing.
There is nothing wrong with admitting you can't produce anything to support your argument we've had the same from brexiteers for three years and they can't either.
-
Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.
BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.
-
Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.
BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.
Just not precise SSF non-existent you have not put together a coherent example of how the UK will be financially better off, plenty of arm waving and look over there but hard fact zero.
Lets just enjoy our moment on the sun with our new manager, I get fed up with asking brexiteers the same questions and getting the same non-answers. Lets face it if credible economists and parliamentarians with all their resources cannot answer the question then I'm afraid it must be beyond you also, mission impossible.
-
Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.
BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.
Just not precise SSF non-existent you have not put together a coherent example of how the UK will be financially better off, plenty of arm waving and look over there but hard fact zero.
Lets just enjoy our moment on the sun with our new manager, I get fed up with asking brexiteers the same questions and getting the same non-answers. Lets face it if credible economists and parliamentarians with all their resources cannot answer the question then I'm afraid it must be beyond you also, mission impossible.
But I've enjoyed the back and forth none the less. A bit less fanaticism on both sides of the debate (and I'm not referring to anyone here) might mean we all end up at a feasible solution but I dare say odds are people like you and I will be arguing over this for the next few decades. Thanks SR, and agree I'll go back to enjoying the DM news!
-
All the pages on Brexit and I bet not one of us have changed our original opinions on the subject..SouthStand for the record my opinions lean towards yours but they will be a minority on here and it can be a thankless task,as I'm sure it is for the other viewpoint too..
Still I cant resist this gentle dig,One things for sure if that Panorama programme would have been about the Tories we would have had a thread about it and be on page 5 by now with endless cries of disgust..Yet strangely not a peep about it...lol
-
SSF
It's odd that you focus on Govt debt. That kind of reinforces the point I was making about how that one issue has dominated the discussion in the UK.
You could have noted that Spain's GDP has increased almost 10 fold since it joined the EU.
Or that Romania's GDP has more than doubled in a decade since it joined the EU.
You talk about trade with Africa.
1) Africa's current GDP is less than 1/9th that of the EU.
2) Yes they are growing more quickly than EU countries (or the USA or Japan or Canada etc...) but that's what less developed countries do. If they grew at 5% more than the EU per year for 50 years (they won't, growth rates drop as development increases) it would be 50 years before they had the same GDP as the EU. So why on earth make it significantly harder to trade with the EU now?
3) In any case, we CAN trade with Africa from inside the EU...
4) There is a massive positive point about the EU that no Leaver ever addresses. The way in which, by tying countries together, it reinforces democracy and peace in the most dangerous region on earth.
Within living memory, the following countries have been invaded, invaded others, had civil wars or lived under military dictatorships.
UK
France
Luxembourg.
Belgium
Netherlands
Spain
Portugal
Italy
Czechia
Slovakia
Austria
Denmark
Norway
Germany
Poland
Estonia
Lithuania
Latvia
Hungary
Slovenia
Croatia
Greece
Bulgaria
Romania
Hungary
Malta
Cyprus
That happened within living memory. Within. Living. Memory.
The EU is a major part in why it is currently inconceivable that could happen again in the mid-future.
And don't say..but NATO.
NATO didn't stop civil war in Northern Ireland, Slovenia, Croatia and Cyprus.
It didn't prevent fascist military dictatorships in Greece, Portugal and Spain.
But there has never been a civil war in an EU member state. Never been an overthrowing of democracy in an EU member state.
Just ponder that. And think whether you just take for granted a stability that our parents and grandparents dreamed of.
Having served the country in some genuinely unstable regions I can assure you I don't take stability for granted.
Can you honestly say the EU is the most dangerous region on earth? Really?
It was ten years before the EU was created.
-
Sydney I'm not going to keep listing my reasons as you will clearly just keep retorting that they aren't precise enough for you.
BST with respect, and I acknowledge your impressive history knowledge... I think you're in danger of patronising me. That I assume continued peace is an untruth.
I'm not patronising you at all. I'm hammering home THE most important point about the EU.
You responded incredulously when I said Europe was the most dangerous place on earth. I've set out the evidence that supports my assertion and pointed out the undeniable role that the EU has played in quelling the nationalistic passions that resulted in that carnage. .
The re-emergence of right-wing nationalism across Europe scares the living shite out of me. Because I don't want my kids to grow up in a Europe like the one that my grandparents grew up in. And that is a clear and obvious danger if the EU is undermined.
-
All the pages on Brexit and I bet not one of us have changed our original opinions on the subject..SouthStand for the record my opinions lean towards yours but they will be a minority on here and it can be a thankless task,as I'm sure it is for the other viewpoint too..
Still I cant resist this gentle dig,One things for sure if that Panorama programme would have been about the Tories we would have had a thread about it and be on page 5 by now with endless cries of disgust..Yet strangely not a peep about it...lol
Totally agree WC. The Labour Party is in danger of being completely destroyed by the anti-semitism accusations, and all people can talk about on here is Brexit.
-
I'd probably change my vote, or at the very least not vote at all if there was another referendum. I couldn't vote for a Remain side that supports politicians who have gone flat out to derail and finally try to destroy a democratic vote by insisting on another democratic vote because the result of the first democratic vote wasn't what they voted for.
This forum has produced the most patronising responses imaginable on the subject which has resulted in a silent majority not wishing to take part in the discussion.
Just my opinion, like, based on my own conversations with people - Hence no link!
-
I'd probably change my vote, or at the very least not vote at all if there was another referendum. I couldn't vote for a Remain side that supports politicians who have gone flat out to derail and finally try to destroy a democratic vote by insisting on another democratic vote because the result of the first democratic vote wasn't what they voted for.
This forum has produced the most patronising responses imaginable on the subject which has resulted in a silent majority not wishing to take part in the discussion.
Just my opinion, like, based on my own conversations with people - Hence no link!
Brilliant post BB.
-
You're in a tiny minority as ever BB. There's only a tiny fraction of the population have switched from Remain to Leave.
It is an odd attitude though. Change your vote because you think people have been mean to you. Change your vote because you say politicians have been untrustworthy. All while ignoring facts laid out and ignoring the politicians who have demonstrably lied about what Leave was supposed to mean, and manipulated it for their own ends.
But perhaps I'm being patronising...
-
Me too, and I know six other people who would vote out now who voted remain the last time, three youngsters among them.
-
BST. There's rarely any doubt about your posts being patronising, and yes, your last one is just that, no perhaps about it.
I might be in a tiny minority of voters switching from remain to abstain (or leave). but I'd have to take your word for that. The trouble is, with your past record of 'facts' it's not easy to take your new offerings seriously. And, why have people been mean to me?
I would change my vote not just because politicians have lied, politicians have always lied. I would change my vote because I don't want to be on the same side as voters who are willing to destroy a democratic vote to get their own way in another democratic vote.
Voters like you.
-
BB
Thank you for that useful contribution.
People like me, as I've explained times many, and you have ignored an equal number of times, would have supported a Norway-style Brexit 30 months ago.
People like me won't accept a wafer-thin vote being used to drive through a hard Brexit that the Leave side specifically and repeatedly told us wasn't on the agenda. People like me think that is a democratic outrage.
Happy to clear that up for you. Doubtless you'll ignore it again because it doesn't fit what you want people like me to actually think.
-
So you agreed with Farage 30 months ago?
-
No. Of course didn't. Because Farage never meant it. He said it to dupe people. It was f**king obvious to anyone who thought for a moment that he didn't mean it, because a Norway deal meant keeping freedom of movement.
I'd have taken a Norway deal as a sensible compromise in winter 16/17 because it was an obvious response to a wafer-thin vote. I wouldn't have liked it, but I'd have taken it as the least- bad solution, minimising the social polarization and giving the least bad economic effect short of actually staying in.
That possibility was snatched away by May interpreting the Vote as a mandate for a harder Brexit. Then the ERG rejected May's interpretation and demanded a harder still Brexit.
And it is because of THAT that my take hardened against the concept of us leaving at all.
And once again, I don't doubt that you'll ignore that post and make some smart arse response.
-
Farage wasn't responsible for our politicians determination to destroy Brexit.
-
QED.
-
It won’t be tom Watson he speaks out and they all want rid of him, maybe it’s labour who are the nasty party
-
It won’t be tom Watson he speaks out and they all want rid of him, maybe it’s labour who are the nasty party
How nasty the Labour Party have now become was amply demonstrated on BBC Breakfast this morning by that dangerously subversive left-wing group - The Scouts
https://twitter.com/martin83239350/status/1149955480812511232
-
The Boris propaganda service has excelled itself again with the following:
''We can improve mental health, save money and boost the economy all in one go, Boris Johnson''
With Boris photo and Churchill photo and story next to each other so you the reader can make the mental leap.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/14/can-improve-mental-health-save-money-boost-economy-one-go/
May as well roll out the big red bus again! just in case anyone is wavering and hasn't put their vote in yet.