Brexit deal

[wilts rover]

May to make written offer to Labour setting out the proposals she plans to put to MP's, which will include plans for a vote on a 'confirmatory referendum'.

Brexiteer MP's said to be furious and attempting to destablilise PM.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/04/theresa-may-to-make-written-brexit-offer-to-jeremy-corbyn

[SydneyRover]

I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!

We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.

6,063,705 signatures

[Bentley Bullet]

I see the 'neutral' BBC's line up on Question time tonight is:

Pro Remain = 4
Leave = 1

Oh, and not forgetting the ever so neutral chairmanperson!

[SydneyRover]

The 'left behind'
''Matthew Goodwin and Rob Ford coined the term 'The Left Behind' to refer to 'older, white, socially conservative voters in more economically marginal neighbourhoods'.[28] Analysing data the day after the Referendum, Ford concluded that 'Such voters had turned against a political class they saw as dominated by socially liberal university graduates with values fundamentally opposed to theirs, on identity, Europe – and particularly immigration.' This was described in as "if you've got money, you vote in... if you haven't got money, you vote out".[29] In looser terms, these groups' wider dissatisfaction with the major political parties also had a significant impact on the vote – with a particular focus placed on Labour's decline in support in the working class heartlands where it saw a significant number of votes lost to UKIP and the Conservatives in 2015.[30]''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_vote_in_favour_of_Brexit

[Bentley Bullet]

I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!

We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.

6,063,705 signatures

I wonder how many people asked to sign told them to f**k off?

[Bentley Bullet]

The 'left behind'
''Matthew Goodwin and Rob Ford coined the term 'The Left Behind' to refer to 'older, white, socially conservative voters in more economically marginal neighbourhoods'.[28] Analysing data the day after the Referendum, Ford concluded that 'Such voters had turned against a political class they saw as dominated by socially liberal university graduates with values fundamentally opposed to theirs, on identity, Europe – and particularly immigration.' This was described in as "if you've got money, you vote in... if you haven't got money, you vote out".[29] In looser terms, these groups' wider dissatisfaction with the major political parties also had a significant impact on the vote – with a particular focus placed on Labour's decline in support in the working class heartlands where it saw a significant number of votes lost to UKIP and the Conservatives in 2015.[30]''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_vote_in_favour_of_Brexit

I never realised 52% of the voters were THAT rich!

[Bentley Bullet]

The BBC Remain V Brexit football match has yet to announce the line-ups, but it is understood the Remain formation will be 4-4-2.

The Leave formation is expected to be 2-0-0.

[SydneyRover]

I bet the other 5 think he's a real asset!

We all know who the leader is though BB; the one whose every word they hang on to.

6,063,705 signatures

I wonder how many people asked to sign told them to f**k off?

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584

[Bentley Bullet]

Aaaaaaannnnndddddd, I wonder how many have told them to f**k off?

[Bentley Bullet]

Did you see Question time tonight? Apparently, the 1 Leave supporter against 4 Remainers on the panel was balanced because the audience was evenly split (allegedly)! That's like saying a polo match involving a full side of 4 players against one opposition player was evenly matched because the crowd watching was evenly split! As ridiculously biased as that is, it goes further when the referee sways towards the team with 4 players!!!

[SydneyRover]

Aaaaaaannnnndddddd, I wonder how many have told them to f**k off?

That's no way to conduct yourself on a family forum bb, frustrated by recent events? I know you must be feeling let down, I know if I had signed up to this only to find out I'd been lied to on an industrial scale I'd want my money back too. Remain calm and carry on is the best medicine.

''Leaked emails show infiltration fears before attempt to oust Grieve''

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/04/leaked-emails-show-infiltration-fears-before-dominic-grieve-tory-confidence-vote

Inquiry launched into data use from no-deal Brexit ads on Facebook

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/04/inquiry-launched-into-data-use-from-no-deal-brexit-ads-on-facebook

[Bentley Bullet]

Sydney. I fully understand your policy of posting selected links in your attempt to convince others that they are wrong, but I can guarantee as a fact, not just an opinion that it is you that's wrong this time. I didn't vote to leave, I voted to remain. The fact that I believe in democracy and accept a democratic vote, whereas you obviously don't, is the main gist of why I think your opinions are fundamentally flawed.

Did you see Question Time tonight?

[SydneyRover]

Sydney. I fully understand your policy of posting selected links in your attempt to convince others that they are wrong, but I can guarantee as a fact, not just an opinion that it is you that's wrong this time. I didn't vote to leave, I voted to remain. The fact that I believe in democracy and accept a democratic vote, whereas you obviously don't, is the main gist of why I think your opinions are fundamentally flawed.

Did you see Question Time tonight?

No I missed QT. I understand that you voted to stay but everyone understands that the leave vote was a narrow victory in a fairly low turn-out (no compulsory voting = low turn-out)

The main point of contention of those that voted to remain in Europe, apart from the majority of experts in many fields telling us we would be better off in, and the huge positive for all that there has been no war within the EU and it's unlikely that an outside country would want to take that option because we consist of 28 United countries is that ........ (deep breath) ................. there has been a concerted effort to poison the well, to stir up trouble within the UK to get people to vote leave, This is an undeniable fact and most reasonable people would/could see that it played a large part in getting the No vote up.

Do you agree with this or not?

If you do agree then the next step logical would be to support those that want the country to have a legitimate vote where everyone fully understands what they are voting for and what is at stake.

If you don't agree it would be good for you to explain to me and the forum, (not that you have to of course as I stated in an earlier post most leavers faced with direct questions ignore them or change the subject) in common sense terms why not. This is an open question to anyone on the forum leave or not.

PS: I put up posts relevant to the subject in hand mostly on topic from credible sources and yes helpful in supporting my arguments. I don't really have time to read partisan articles from sources that have a history of being bias, inaccurate, just plain wrong or have engaged in illegal activities. Why would anyone want to read them anyway?

[DonnyOsmond]

Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.

Yet again two different issues being linked. A point for many is that the choices should be made by the UK government.

Where I do agree with your point is whether the government of any party makes the right choices with that funds or would. Possibly not, but at least that is something as UK voters we could change.

On the earlier point of a confirmatory vote, not keen on that but it may well not actually get through parliament I reckon.

[IDM]

So now May is asking the EU for an extension to 30 June, still hoping that we can agree a deal and leave by 23 May, but is willing to put up candidates for the European elections..

I can’t see how a resolution can be reached in a couple of months having failed over almost 3 years.?

The EU may offer a 12 month flexible extension..

[RedJ]

And the press are referring to it as a flextension.

I can't f**king wait for the whole thing to be done with either way so that we can stop making up f**king stupid words.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.

Yet again two different issues being linked. A point for many is that the choices should be made by the UK government.

Where I do agree with your point is whether the government of any party makes the right choices with that funds or would. Possibly not, but at least that is something as UK voters we could change.

On the earlier point of a confirmatory vote, not keen on that but it may well not actually get through parliament I reckon.

That point about Govt making the right choices is key BFYP.

Govts make choices for political reasons. And the established fact is that twice under Tory Govts (once in the 90s, and right now) South Yorkshire has slipped into the list of the poorest regions in the EU. Directly as the result of those political choices.

The EU Structural Fund is very important here, precisely because it is NOT decided politically. Regions AUTOMATICALLY get funding when their economy dips below a certain level, in order to get them firing again. It's not about politicians deciding that the money would be better spent in London than Donny.

I hear your comment about it being better if the decisions were made at home. I hear it a lot. It is a very idealistic one. And the record shows that, when politicians make decisions at home for political reasons, the outcomes are often grossly unfair. The EU Structural Fund was set up precisely to counter that.

By leaving the EU, South Yorkshire is going to lose €3.3bn of EU Structural Fund investment over the next 7 years. We've taken back control, great. But does anyone think our Tory Govt is going to find even a tenth of that amount of money to give to SY?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Another expert opinion to be ignored.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801

Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark

You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.

If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.

Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.

Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.

Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?

And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.

Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.

That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.

So let me get this right BS.

You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?

[BillyStubbsTears]

And off we go down the road again.

https://mobile.twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1114080691518627840?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1114080691518627840&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fuk-politics-47825841

Brilliant surreal comic comment on Twitter last week.

Picture the scene. Last week of March 2519.

The PM of the UK goes to Brussels to prostrate themselves in front of the President of Europe and plead for the annual extension of Article 50. Hundreds of giggling tourists taking photos of the ritual spectacle whose origins have been forgotten in the mists of history.

[DonnyOsmond]

Personally I think a fair few people voted leave because they see the amount of money going to the EU and think it can be used on underfunded services. The services which have all been cut due to austerity, so there's no reason why they will be forced to use that money anyway. My own dad shares this crap on Facebook saying let's stop giving the money to the EU and spend it on our own services. You're taking away money from something that wants to put money in to areas like Doncaster and give it to something that brought in austerity that's led to food banks.

Yet again two different issues being linked. A point for many is that the choices should be made by the UK government.

Where I do agree with your point is whether the government of any party makes the right choices with that funds or would. Possibly not, but at least that is something as UK voters we could change.

On the earlier point of a confirmatory vote, not keen on that but it may well not actually get through parliament I reckon.

That point about Govt making the right choices is key BFYP.

Govts make choices for political reasons. And the established fact is that twice under Tory Govts (once in the 90s, and right now) South Yorkshire has slipped into the list of the poorest regions in the EU. Directly as the result of those political choices.

The EU Structural Fund is very important here, precisely because it is NOT decided politically. Regions AUTOMATICALLY get funding when their economy dips below a certain level, in order to get them firing again. It's not about politicians deciding that the money would be better spent in London than Donny.

I hear your comment about it being better if the decisions were made at home. I hear it a lot. It is a very idealistic one. And the record shows that, when politicians make decisions at home for political reasons, the outcomes are often grossly unfair. The EU Structural Fund was set up precisely to counter that.

By leaving the EU, South Yorkshire is going to lose €3.3bn of EU Structural Fund investment over the next 7 years. We've taken back control, great. But does anyone think our Tory Govt is going to find even a tenth of that amount of money to give to SY?

100% agree with this. I don't understand why the areas that receive the most funding from the EU seem to be the highest leave voting areas though? Don't bite off the hand that feeds.

[BillyStubbsTears]

The degree of national humiliation in this letter is of historic magnitude. We have utterly humiliated ourselves from start to finish.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexForsythBBC/status/1114073617657204736

Here's a plain interpretation.

In 2016, we voted Leave without having a clue what Leave meant. I, without any consultation, interpreted it to mean what I wanted it to mean. I spent two years negotiating a deal with you to implement this, knowing all the time it didn't have a chance of getting support in Parliament. I delayed the time for Parliament to give its verdict until the very last moment, then had to come and ask you for more time.

I've now, finally, after 30 months, started doing what I should have done at the start, which is to consult with Parliament to find an acceptable compromise deal. We won't be able to do that before the 12 April deadline that you and I agreed last week and I note that you said the alternative is a one year extension to give us time to sort our incompetent shite out. So I'm now asking you for a 3 month extension. Which will not be time to sort out anything, meaning we'll be back here again in June.

Yours etc...

Look back through history. Ask yourself when a British PM has so spectacularly mismanaged an issue of such importance and led us into such a national humiliation.

[MachoMadness]

No massive fan of Sturgeon, but when someone's right, they're right...
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1114094310285246464

[Boomstick]

Another expert opinion to be ignored.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801

Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark

You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.

If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.

Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.

Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.

Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?

And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.

Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.

That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.

So let me get this right BS.

You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?

Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?

Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.

[RedJ]

Another expert opinion to be ignored.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801

Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark

You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.

If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.

Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.

Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.

Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?

And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.

Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.

That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.

So let me get this right BS.

You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?

Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?

Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.

He hasn't said that's what's going to happen... it's a simple question, not sure why you refuse to answer?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Another expert opinion to be ignored.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801

Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark

You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.

If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.

Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.

Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.

Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?

And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.

Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.

That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.

So let me get this right BS.

You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?

Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?

Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.

No. You're misunderstanding again. I didn't say those things would happen. I was trying to establish a principle.

It's a common rhetorical technique when one person in a discussion refuses to engage. You set a ridiculously exaggerated scenario to establish the principle that there ARE things that would be unacceptable. Then, having done that, you can start moving back into more realistic areas.

I'll say that in simpler words. I don't believe that there is no economic price you wouldn't be prepared to pay. And I'm interested in exploring  what your limit actually is.

You seem peculiarly determined not to address that point.

The reason I wanted to find out what your economic red line was, is that we ARE going to lose a lot of economic wealth under any form of Brexit. We've lost too side of £6,500 per family since 2016, according to several independent analyses. And that's projected to roll on, gathering speed over the next decade.

So, I'll ask once again. What price would you be prepared to pay in lost wealth?

You think my ridiculous extreme of you being penniless, homeless and starving is too stupid to contemplate. Which suggests that you think THAT wouldn't be a price worth paying. So we've established one red-line, albeit a ridiculously exaggerated one. So tell me. What WOULD be a fair price?

How about the UK being poorer than France and Italy? Like we were in 1970 before we joined the EEC. Would you be happy if we took back control but dropped down the list of economic superpowers?

[Boomstick]

Another expert opinion to be ignored.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801

Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark

You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.

If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.

Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.

Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.

Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?

And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.

Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.

That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.

So let me get this right BS.

You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?

Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?

Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.

No. You're misunderstanding again. I didn't say those things would happen. I was trying to establish a principle.

It's a common rhetorical technique when one person in a discussion refuses to engage. You set a ridiculously exaggerated scenario to establish the principle that there ARE things that would be unacceptable. Then, having done that, you can start moving back into more realistic areas.

I'll say that in simpler words. I don't believe that there is no economic price you wouldn't be prepared to pay. And I'm interested in exploring  what your limit actually is.

You seem peculiarly determined not to address that point.

The reason I wanted to find out what your economic red line was, is that we ARE going to lose a lot of economic wealth under any form of Brexit. We've lost too side of £6,500 per family since 2016, according to several independent analyses. And that's projected to roll on, gathering speed over the next decade.

So, I'll ask once again. What price would you be prepared to pay in lost wealth?

You think my ridiculous extreme of you being penniless, homeless and starving is too stupid to contemplate. Which suggests that you think THAT wouldn't be a price worth paying. So we've established one red-line, albeit a ridiculously exaggerated one. So tell me. What WOULD be a fair price?

How about the UK being poorer than France and Italy? Like we were in 1970 before we joined the EEC. Would you be happy if we took back control but dropped down the list of economic superpowers?

Like I said, I didn't vote leave on economic reasons, so my mind won't change because of them.
You have bleeted on about these so called experts predicting what will happen to the economy, and how. It may affect each household. Those predicted affects haven't changed my mind.

Let's flip this on its head, how much control are you willing to give the EU?
Are you willing to adopt the euro?
Are you willing to take millions on millions of immigrants?
Are you OK about the creation of an EU army?
Are you willing to continue adopting EU laws with out proper representation?
Are you willing to accept more ghettos like page hall forming?
Are you willing to allow huge amounts of strain being put of the NHS and other services, and infrastructure on our small island?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Boomstick.

Ok. So I assume that you WOULD be prepared to live naked in a cave and eat grass in order to take back control. Glad we've got that sorted. That puts you into a tiny, fanatical minority.

Me?
No, I don't want us to accept the Euro. Or have an EU army. Neither of those things are going to be imposed on us, so they are hypothetical, but I e answered them anyway.


I'm happy to cede a certain amount of legislative control because of the benefits we get.
Immigration. We need immigration. My wife is an immigrant's daughter. My mother is an immigrant's granddaughter. I assume you have a similar background. I'm not sure what you mean by "millions and millions" so that's a bit of a pointless question. 1? Yes. 100? No. And we can currently control levels if we choose to.

NHS and services? That's a UK Govt decision. It's well established that immigration makes us wealthier. If this Govt chooses not to use that wealth to properly fund services, that's our problem, not one caused by the EU.

There you go. That's how you answer questions. Shame you won't join in but there you go.

[idler]

The way I look at it the leave campaign grossly exaggerated their ability to control immigration after a brexit to attract certain elements.
You also can’t tar all immigrants with the same brush either.
Anyone that is willing to work hard,pay taxes and integrate should be welcomed.
Any that make no effort and just want benefits should be rejected, we have enough of those that can trace their ancestry back here generations.
I saw a woman from Rotherham on TV once complaining about immigrants pinching our benefits. This was someone grossly overweight that didn’t work.

[Axholme Lion]

Another expert opinion to be ignored.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47807801

Ah he sticks his oar in to tell us what we already know.
A no deal is a high possibility, and it won't be easy.
Thanks Mark

You complain when people use blunt language. Now you're complaining about Carney using very diplomatic language. He has to tread a very careful path to avoid appearing overtly politically partisan. So if he is saying this publicly, you can imagine what he considers to be the dangers associated with No Deal, or what he is saying in private.

If he says in public that claims that no deal could be easily managed are absolute nonsense, you can interpret that as him diplomatically saying it would be an utter f**king catastrophe.

Or you could ignore it and say that we survived The Blitz, The Plague and The Ice Ages, so we'll survive No Deal.

Oh aye. And you say he's sticking his oar in. This is the professional whose job it is to make sure our economy is protected against the worst that events can throw at it. And you think him commenting on the effect of Brexit is him sticking his oar in.

Serious question. Is there any possible contribution from anyone that would make you sit back and consider that you might be wrong on the seriousness of the consequences of No Deal?

And while we're at it, in your rush to suggest we meet, you didn't answer my other serious question last night, about how much you personally would be prepared to lose in order to take back control. That wasn't a bullying question or a trick or anything like that. It was genuine interest.

Funny how he says the square mile will not be affected at all, funny how you neglect to mention that.
As for what I'm prepared to lose, or more accurately not gain. I'd prefer to wait and see, but it's an irrelevant question, I didn't vote leave for economic reasons, and economic reasons WILL NOT change my mind.

That offer to meet still stands, if you fancy crawling out from behind your keyboard.

So let me get this right BS.

You'd be prepared to lose your home? The shirt off your back?
Every penny in the bank?
You'd be prepared to be destitute, homeless and penniless in order to take back control of our sovereignty?

Wow, your really ramping up project fear. Getting desparate?

Nothing even close to resembling anything like your slavering on about will happen.

No. You're misunderstanding again. I didn't say those things would happen. I was trying to establish a principle.

It's a common rhetorical technique when one person in a discussion refuses to engage. You set a ridiculously exaggerated scenario to establish the principle that there ARE things that would be unacceptable. Then, having done that, you can start moving back into more realistic areas.

I'll say that in simpler words. I don't believe that there is no economic price you wouldn't be prepared to pay. And I'm interested in exploring  what your limit actually is.

You seem peculiarly determined not to address that point.

The reason I wanted to find out what your economic red line was, is that we ARE going to lose a lot of economic wealth under any form of Brexit. We've lost too side of £6,500 per family since 2016, according to several independent analyses. And that's projected to roll on, gathering speed over the next decade.

So, I'll ask once again. What price would you be prepared to pay in lost wealth?

You think my ridiculous extreme of you being penniless, homeless and starving is too stupid to contemplate. Which suggests that you think THAT wouldn't be a price worth paying. So we've established one red-line, albeit a ridiculously exaggerated one. So tell me. What WOULD be a fair price?

How about the UK being poorer than France and Italy? Like we were in 1970 before we joined the EEC. Would you be happy if we took back control but dropped down the list of economic superpowers?

Like I said, I didn't vote leave on economic reasons, so my mind won't change because of them.
You have bleeted on about these so called experts predicting what will happen to the economy, and how. It may affect each household. Those predicted affects haven't changed my mind.

Let's flip this on its head, how much control are you willing to give the EU?
Are you willing to adopt the euro?
Are you willing to take millions on millions of immigrants?
Are you OK about the creation of an EU army?
Are you willing to continue adopting EU laws with out proper representation?
Are you willing to accept more ghettos like page hall forming?
Are you willing to allow huge amounts of strain being put of the NHS and other services, and infrastructure on our small island?

Exactly. Why can the remainers not understand all of your points?