More post brexit referendum good news!!!!

[Greenmile]

Not still on about the qualified audit report, are you?

I’m on about your general propensity for dishonesty, whether it’s about Brexit, abortion, climate change, or anything else, you always seem to prefer a convenient lie to an inconvenient truth.

Edit - even the quoted post is an example of this. TallPaul has explained why you are wrong, but you chose to ignore the inconvenient facts presented to you.

[Greenmile]

Yes I will since you've shown no evidence that I threatened your friend! I'm reading your posts with a wooden look on my face!

Go on then. Do you need me to repeat it for you, or explain any of the longer words?

[Paul Waine]

Because the EU cannot give us as good as we have now, or everybody will leave. You know that, I know that, Everybody knows that.

Hi Lancs, I've seen that statement a number of times.

Just on the first sentence: if the EU agreed a deal with the UK that resulted in the UK getting "as good as we have now" why would every other member state leave?

It's kind of illogical, isn't it?

Isn't it more logical to argue that if the EU cannot agree a deal with the UK that allows the UK to be (at least) as well off outside the EU as the UK is in the EU then all the other member states of the EU would be better off leaving?

The first statement suggest that you are better off subject to the agreed parameters of the EU, but if the EU cannot assist the UK maintain it's standing after the UK leaves the EU, doesn't it mean that the EU cannot also maintain the standing of any member state that remains in the EU?

You see, I believe there is a "win-win" option or a "lose-lose" option, and to continue my "hand of friendship" suggestion, there is no "win-lose" option, and both the EU and the UK should be extending their hands in friendship - as should we all - and solving the challenges together (a problem shared, is a problem halved, and all that...).

[RingoMcCartney]

Anyone else worried about whether the sun will come up tomorrow?

Your assertion to the sun rising on Wednesday 6th June is a highly likely event. Its your forecast. Its your prediction. Its your OPINION,with which I agree.

Until it does. You CANNOT provide any evidence that it has. UNTIL IT'S HAPPENED!

[Greenmile]

Your assertion to the sun rising on Wednesday 6th June is a highly likely event. Its your forecast. Its your prediction. Its your OPINION,with which I agree.

Until it does. You CANNOT provide any evidence that it has. UNTIL IT'S HAPPENED!

What makes it “a highly likely event”?

[Lancasterclaret]

However, I see parallels with the Treaty of Versailles.

I do not, and its very disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

This not a war, it is not anything remotely like that.

The only people trying to peddle the idea that the EU is "punishing us" are the very politicians that got us into this in the first place.

Our country has decided to turn its back on a shared European project, whose expansion and market ideas were driven by the UK in the first place. We have to sort out where we are going, and we need to sort it out fast.

[Lancasterclaret]

Paul, you seem to want everyone to believe in your vision of Brexit.

I fail to see how Brenda from Hartlepool posting that "this brexit thing isn't a good idea is it?" affects our governments ability to do its job.

The mandate for leave is clear. The mandate for "Hard Brexit" is not. The mandate for a Brexit in which we don't blow our own balls off is massive. Its up to the government to agree that, and the fact that they can't even get past the first three obstacles is not a good sign.

[RingoMcCartney]

What makes it “a highly likely event”?

Something that's happened previously , repeating itself.

The UK has never left the EU before......

[Greenmile]

Something that's happened previously , repeating itself.

The evidence of past events, then.

[RingoMcCartney]

The evidence of past events, then.

So, do you believe a prosecution could pin a murder on an individual, based on evidence from previous murders. Particularly, when that murder hasn't actually taken place yet?

Yes or no?

[Lancasterclaret]

This is quite a reach now Ringo, even by your standards

[RingoMcCartney]

The evidence of past events, then.

Cat got your tongue Greenmile! Or, as it appears, you've logged out!

[RingoMcCartney]

This is quite a reach now Ringo, even by your standards

In what way?

[Greenmile]

So, do you believe a prosecution could pin a murder on an individual, based on evidence from previous murders. Particularly, when that murder hasn't actually taken place yet?

Yes or no?

No, but I believe the sun will come up tomorrow, based on evidence.

[aggi]

Your assertion to the sun rising on Wednesday 6th June is a highly likely event. Its your forecast. Its your prediction. Its your OPINION,with which I agree.

Until it does. You CANNOT provide any evidence that it has. UNTIL IT'S HAPPENED!

When you take a step are you always wondering a little bit whether or not gravity will still be working or if you're just going to float into the air? It is possible to look at the current state of a system and calculate the future state.

Although in the context of the EU immigrants question or whatever it was that you've been refusing to discuss the available evidence supports your stance, not MartinP's.

As for your murder question, have a read of this https://dudley.harvard.edu/files/dudley ... report.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Healeywoodclaret]

Go on then. Do you need me to repeat it for you, or explain any of the longer words?

How old are you? 8? Absolutely Hilarious!

[Lancasterclaret]

Do you want to know where we are at Brexiteers?

This sums it up in a nutshell

Conservative MP with no clue about what we can do, and admitting that the Govt and the DUP were not on the same page yesterday.

Total incompetence

https://twitter.com/vicderbyshire/statu ... 4976009217" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Greenmile]

How old are you? 8? Absolutely Hilarious!

Are you going to answer my question? You said you would.

[Healeywoodclaret]

I did. Just too dumb to understand the metaphor! Stop demanding. You are making some demands on here. Well I'm still waiting...... Show me your evidence that your friend was threatened.... And it needs to be more than an incitement to violence in your book. In fact don't bother, you are really starting to bore me now.

[RingoMcCartney]

No, but I believe the sun will come up tomorrow, based on evidence.

Hahaha!

Exactly!!!!

And whether you realise it, or not, you agree with what I was saying to Martin p.

The subject was this-

I BELIEVE leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WILL help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

I have no EVIDENCE that it will. None. Its just my opinion. My view, my BELIEF, my forecast. But until it happens I have no EVIDENCE.

Martin disagreed. He said, leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WON'T help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery. And somehow believing that becuase something was his view, it was, without question, right. He said that all was simply left with, was an opinion or BELIEF.

Where as he had EVIDENCE. I asked him to provide it. He couldn't possibly do it.

I pointed out that, given we had not left the EU, he could not provide any EVIDENCE that leaving the EU and ending free movement of people would not help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

I said thar all we BOTH had was an opinion.

You have a belief the sun will rise tomorrow. I share that belief. But neither can provide EVIDENCE that it actually did. Till it does.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I am disappointed, but as folk will know from my comments on here since the referendum, far from surprised at where we are now.

It isn’t hard. We stick to the red lines (May’s, Boris’s whoever). We then get as close to the EU as we can .

If the Irish try it on, tough. If we get forced (eventually) to a hard Brexit of sorts, so be it. Red lines are red lines. We HAVE to be out of the Common Customs Tariff. We HAVE to have full rule of law. We HAVE to have control of migration (but by all means keep it high).

The big issue is that May got outflanked by the EU and the Irish by them briefing that she had accepted something that she had not. They thought she would sign it. Credit to her (and the DUP) for not doing. For once, I thought Juncker and the Irish leader looked devastated yesterday.

May’s close pal Nick Timothy said on Twitter yesterday to ignore Leave voters at your peril by choosing to ignore regaining sovereignty. I think he gets it, despite his shambolic election manifesto.

[martin_p]

Hahaha!

Exactly!!!!

And whether you realise it you agree with what I was saying to Martin p.

The subject was this-

I BELIEVE leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WILL help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

I have no EVIDENCE that it will.None. Its my opinion. My view, my forecast. But until it happens I have no EVIDENCE.

Martin disagreed. He said, leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WON'T help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery. And somehow believing that becuase something was his view, it was, without question, right. He said that all was simply left with was an opinion or BELIEF.

Where as he had EVIDENCE.

I pointed out that, given we had not left the EU, he could not provide any EVIDENCE that leaving the EU and ending free movement of people would not help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

All we BOTH had was an opinion.

You have a belief the sun will rise tomorrow. I share that belief. But neither can provide EVIDENCE that it actually did. Till it does.

I’ll explain it one last time! It’s not leaving the EU that’s the key bit here, it’s us being in a position of no free movement. There’s plenty of stats out there that show that whether a country has free movement or not doesn’t affect the volume of people trafficking. In fact the countries with the worst people trafficking problems have no free movement. There’s no evidence supporting a correlation between the two. So your belief that trafficking will be reduced by Brexit is just that, a belief. My opinion that it will make no difference is based on the evidence that there is no correlation between free movement and trafficking.

I can evidence the sun rising tomorrow by understanding that the sun is always there during the day time in the uk (if often hidden by clouds!). The fact that the sun has never risen on a Wednesday 6th December 2017 before isn't relevant, it’s the fact that every 24 your period has a daytime and a nighttime that’s important.

[RingoMcCartney]

When you take a step are you always wondering a little bit whether or not gravity will still be working or if you're just going to float into the air? It is possible to look at the current state of a system and calculate the future state.

Although in the context of the EU immigrants question or whatever it was that you've been refusing to discuss the available evidence supports your stance, not MartinP's.

As for your murder question, have a read of this https://dudley.harvard.edu/files/dudley ... report.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No disrespect but do you really think I can be arsed to read 19 pages.

Why not just summarise it. Jesus!

I wasn't refusing to discuss the available evidence as to whether leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WILL help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

There is none.

I said that once we've left, and free movement has ended. It would be fair to allow a period of time, say 3 years, to compare the figures prior to leaving, with the figures figure in 2022. That would allow time to asses whether there'd been a fall in people trafficking, exploitation and slavery.

We'd have actual EVIDENCE. One way or another one of us would be proven right.

[Greenmile]

I did. Just too dumb to understand the metaphor! Stop demanding. You are making some demands on here. Well I'm still waiting...... Show me your evidence that your friend was threatened.... And it needs to be more than an incitement to violence in your book. In fact don't bother, you are really starting to bore me now.

Thank you.

And sorry - I went too far and was out of order in post 1052 above (and maybe earlier too - I’ve not read back through). In my defence I got a little frustrated with you answering my question with questions (which I feel I tried to answer). And I still think incitement to violence (not a threat, admittedly) was also out of order, but if you genuinely didn’t pick up on the double meaning, it was a little more understandable.

[Greenmile]

Hahaha!

Exactly!!!!

And whether you realise it, or not, you agree with what I was saying to Martin p.

The subject was this-

I BELIEVE leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WILL help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

I have no EVIDENCE that it will. None. Its just my opinion. My view, my BELIEF, my forecast. But until it happens I have no EVIDENCE.

Martin disagreed. He said, leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WON'T help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery. And somehow believing that becuase something was his view, it was, without question, right. He said that all was simply left with, was an opinion or BELIEF.

Where as he had EVIDENCE. I asked him to provide it. He couldn't possibly do it.

I pointed out that, given we had not left the EU, he could not provide any EVIDENCE that leaving the EU and ending free movement of people would not help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

I said thar all we BOTH had was an opinion.

You have a belief the sun will rise tomorrow. I share that belief. But neither can provide EVIDENCE that it actually did. Till it does.

Do you accept that you can predict the future (to varying degrees of certainty) by observing the past?

Yes or no?

[RingoMcCartney]

I’ll explain it one last time! It’s not leaving the EU that’s the key bit here, it’s us being in a position of no free movement. There’s plenty of stats out there that show that whether a country has free movement or not doesn’t affect the volume of people trafficking. In fact the countries with the worst people trafficking problems have no free movement. There’s no evidence supporting a correlation between the two. So your belief that trafficking will be reduced by Brexit is just that, a belief. My opinion that it will make no difference is based on the evidence that there is no correlation between free movement and trafficking.

I can evidence the sun rising tomorrow by understanding that the sun is always there during the day time in the uk (if often hidden by clouds!). The fact that the sun has never risen on a Wednesday 6th December 2017 before isn't relevant, it’s the fact that every 24 your period has a daytime and a nighttime that’s important.

"My OPINION that it will make no difference is based on the evidence that there is no correlation between free movement and trafficking."

There you go again!! Your OPINION!

"There’s plenty of stats out there that show that whether a country has free movement or not doesn’t affect the volume of people trafficking. In fact the countries with the worst people trafficking problems have no free movement."

Stats?

Are these countries in any way, shape or form like the island nation that is the UK.? Do they have the same border security that the UK has? And in what way will having increased border checks on cars, vans, lorrys and individuals NOT make it more difficult for the evil people traffickers to ply their trade?

You have no EVIDENCE that it wont. None.

Like me you have an opinion.

If I'm wrong. Post up on here, the document that's headed- "People trafficking and slavery figures since the UK ended free movement of people"

Tick tock.....tick tock.....

[Lancasterclaret]

May’s close pal Nick Timothy said on Twitter yesterday to ignore Leave voters at your peril by choosing to ignore regaining sovereignty. I think he gets it, despite his shambolic election manifesto.

I think that shows exactly why he doesn't get it.

Old people waving flags and remembering their youth pre-EU will be impressed by it, but everybody else who still has to live and work in the Uk?

They want jobs, security, money, holidays etc etc

[Foshiznik]

It’s not leaving the EU that’s the key bit here, it’s us being in a position of no free movement. There’s plenty of stats out there that show that whether a country has free movement or not doesn’t affect the volume of people trafficking. In fact the countries with the worst people trafficking problems have no free movement. There’s no evidence supporting a correlation between the two.

Surely if there is no correlation between the two, then your argument is flawed too? Not that I agree/disagree anymore or less with either of your opinions.

There are arguments for and against you both. For example, Interpol believe "'the free movement of people and goods across the EU's internal borders reduces the chance of detection'. Whilst The Independent thinks "Britain's withdrawal from the EU could dramatically curtail efforts by UK police forces to tackle slavery and human trafficking, making it harder and in some cases “impossible”"

Cardiff University thinks that a pro of Brexit/Human Trafficking is that the laws and policing can be tailored locally to detect and prevent it, whilst having common understanding and regulations between European nations (by staying in the EU) it is easier to access intelligence from each other.

As per most arguments, there are strong pros and cons in both camps.

[RingoMcCartney]

Do you accept that you can predict the future (to varying degrees of certainty) by observing the past?

Yes or no?

YES! YES ! YES!

But it's only that. A PREDICTION!

Till the event has taken place. There can be no EVIDENCE.

[RingoMcCartney]

Surely if there is no correlation between the two, then your argument is flawed too? Not that I agree/disagree anymore or less with either of your opinions.

There are arguments for and against you both. For example, Interpol believe "'the free movement of people and goods across the EU's internal borders reduces the chance of detection'. Whilst The Independent thinks "Britain's withdrawal from the EU could dramatically curtail efforts by UK police forces to tackle slavery and human trafficking, making it harder and in some cases “impossible”"

Cardiff University thinks that a pro of Brexit/Human Trafficking is that the laws and policing can be tailored locally to detect and prevent it, whilst having common understanding and regulations between European nations (by staying in the EU) it is easier to access intelligence from each other.

As per most arguments, there are strong pros and cons in both camps.

We both have opinions. Till we're 2/3 years down the line from March 2019. Neither has evidence.

[CrosspoolClarets]

I think that shows exactly why he doesn't get it.

Old people waving flags and remembering their youth pre-EU will be impressed by it, but everybody else who still has to live and work in the Uk?

They want jobs, security, money, holidays etc etc

Ultimately this comes down to where you are on the authoritarian / libertarian spectrum. Many folk in the UK now are extreme libertarians incouding probably every PM since Thatcher. I’m probably about half way across the scale. If you ask me a question like “to what degree should UK citizens’ interests be prioritised by the UK government” I would probably suggest something like definately a bit but not outrageously. People not heavily liberatarian generally feel that Brexit is best for their interests, and will deliver better jobs, wealth etc. Scrapping the Common Customs Tariff so that shoes, clothes and food are cheaper will help that for the poorer end.

Evidence suggests that where we are on that spectrum is a good predictor of if you voted for Brexit or Trump. Evidence also suggests that Generation Z (16 and under) are increasingly authoritarian, which adds a different complexion to thoughts about voting based on what our kids would want when they grow up.

Anyway, the point is, ignore these people, eventually you get Trump. We don’t want a Trump here. Ignore them at your peril is very astute and wise by Nick Timothy.

[martin_p]

Surely if there is no correlation between the two, then your argument is flawed too? Not that I agree/disagree anymore or less with either of your opinions.

There are arguments for and against you both. For example, Interpol believe "'the free movement of people and goods across the EU's internal borders reduces the chance of detection'. Whilst The Independent thinks "Britain's withdrawal from the EU could dramatically curtail efforts by UK police forces to tackle slavery and human trafficking, making it harder and in some cases “impossible”"

Cardiff University thinks that a pro of Brexit/Human Trafficking is that the laws and policing can be tailored locally to detect and prevent it, whilst having common understanding and regulations between European nations (by staying in the EU) it is easier to access intelligence from each other.

As per most arguments, there are strong pros and cons in both camps.

Thank Christ for someone to have an intelligent conversation with!!

There’s only one of the arguments above that specifically talks about free movement as a factor, the rest are about cross border cooperation and regulations. I accept these are a factor but Ringo was fixated on free movement. It’s also not clear from your Interpol quote on whether they are referring to people trafficking or not. But They are referring to detection rather than prevention.

[Greenmile]

YES! YES ! YES!

But it's only that. A PREDICTION!

Till the event has taken place. There can be no EVIDENCE.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/evidence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.”

Martin has a belief (about a possible future event) and says there is an available body of facts or information (accumulated via the observation of past events) that indicate that his belief is true.

That body of information is called “evidence”.

Now you can argue about whether this evidence exists or is accurate, and you can argue whether it actually indicates his belief is true (and to be fair you seem to have been edging back towards this line over the last few posts), but you can’t just say it’s not evidence.

And when you bring the same daft argument up over and over instead of addressing the actual point (and maybe finding some evidence of your own to support your side), you just look a bit silly.

Edit - you should read Minority Report, by the way. It’s really good.

[RingoMcCartney]

Thank Christ for someone to have an intelligent conversation with!!

There’s only one of the arguments above that specifically talks about free movement as a factor, the rest are about cross border cooperation and regulations. I accept these are a factor but Ringo was fixated on free movement. It’s also not clear from your Interpol quote on whether they are referring to people trafficking or not. But They are referring to detection rather than prevention.

Simply becauae you lost the argument and are unable to provide that evidence that you claimed you had. There's no need for the sneering Martin.

It's not a "fixation" as you claim. It was the entire point of my argument. It was about the UK leaving the European Union and ending free movement of people. Stop trying to move the goal posts and pretend it was some kind of general discussion. It wasn't.

And for the very last time. Where's the evidence you claimed you had. That showed it wouldn't help. The one that's headed - " People trafficking and slavery figures since the UK left the EU and ended free movement of people"

You claimed you had evidence.

You didn't.

[Lancasterclaret]

Agree that we don't want Trump, and we won't get Trump.

Farage has never come close to winning an election here where people actually gave a toss about it (EU elections don't count, because no one here understood that it actually mattered whom you voted in) so that won't happen.

I'm struggling to understand how your authoritarian / libertarian spectrum works here though. I'd say the majority of Brexit voters (older, more affluent ) are authoritarian, in some cases extremley authoritarian, or are we talking about this in an economic sense, rather than a political sense?

[martin_p]

Simply becauae you lost the argument and are unable to provide that evidence that you claimed you had. There's no need for the sneering Martin.

It's not a "fixation" as you claim. It was the entire point of my argument. It was about the UK leaving the European Union and ending free movement of people. Stop trying to move the goal posts and pretend it was some kind of general discussion. It was.

And for the very last time. Where's the evidence you claimed you had. That showed it wouldn't help. The one that's headed - " People trafficking and slavery figures since the UK left the EU and ended free movement of people"

You claimed you had evidence.

You didn't.

Well if you continue to misunderstand the use of the word evidence (even though Greenmile has tried to help you above) there really is no point.

[RingoMcCartney]

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/evidence

“The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.”

Martin has a belief (about a possible future event) and says there is an available body of facts or information (accumulated via the observation of past events) that indicate that his belief is true.

That body of information is called “evidence”.

Now you can argue about whether this evidence exists or is accurate, and you can argue whether it actually indicates his belief is true (and to be fair you seem to have been edging back towards this line over the last few posts), but you can’t just say it’s not evidence.

And when you bring the same daft argument up over and over instead of addressing the actual point (and maybe finding some evidence of your own to support your side), you just look a bit silly.

Edit - you should read Minority Report, by the way. It’s really good.

I have no evidence!

I said it then and I must have said it 4 or 5 times tonight!

I said and am saying it now. We both had an opinion. But Martin clearly thought that because his opinion was his opinion. That was somehow the factual truth.

And I'll use the Oxford definition of evidence too!

"“The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.”

There are no FACTS or INFORMATION about the effects of the UK leaving the European Union and ending free movement of people.

We haven't left yet!

Who looks a bit silly now!?

[RingoMcCartney]

Well if you continue to misunderstand the use of the word evidence (even though Greenmile has tried to help you above) there really is no point.

I'm fully aware of the definition of "evidence" Martin

Greenmile even provided us both with the Oxford English dictionary defintion.

You perhaps need to understand the phrase, "please provide the evidence!"

Till then, I'll hang around till you hop into your Delorean , time travel, retrieve the evidence from 2022, return back, then actually provide it!"

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

Today's Brexit has been even funnier.

British Prime Minister Arlene Foster isn't even bothering to speak to minor subordinate Theresa May

And perhaps the most scathing verdict was that of the Deutschlandfunk commentator Peter Kapern, who described Brexit as “the biggest political nonsense” since the Roman emperor Caligula made his favourite horse a senator. “Anyone who needed further proof of this thesis has received it today,” he wrote.

Even if an agreement on Brexit was reached in the coming days, Kapern said, Monday’s events showed “that the United Kingdom will not only leave the EU but, above all, the world stage”.

This is so funny, I never knew it would be so damaging to Theresa May and the ****** Tory Party or I'd have voted "Leave" meself.

I've changed my mind, can we have a second referendum?

[Greenmile]

I have no evidence!

I said it then and I must have said it 4 or 5 times tonight!

I said and am saying it now. We both had an opinion. But Martin clearly thought that because his opinion was his opinion. That was somehow the factual truth.

And I'll use the Oxford definition of evidence too!

"“The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.”

There are no FACTS or INFORMATION about the effects of the UK leaving the European Union and ending free movement of people.

We haven't left yet!

Who looks a bit silly now!?

Still you, Ringo.

The facts don’t have to be about the belief (in the way you’re using the word).

Let me try once more with an analogy...

People jumping off cliffs have nothing to do with me, but the evidence taken from them jumping tells me it probably wouldn’t be fun if I tried it.

To make it even further removed from me jumping off a cliff, I could use the evidence that an egg breaks when I drop it on the floor, and extrapolate from that that I would hurt myself. Someone dropping an egg on the floor isn’t about me jumping off a cliff at all, is it? But you can use the information from one event as evidence as to what might happen as a result of a totally different event.

Now you might argue that an egg is much more fragile than I am, or that the floor is harder than the sand at the bottom of the cliff. You might also provide your own evidence of, say, a child’s toy surviving a drop from a 1st floor window unscathed. You could even say I made the egg-breaking story up and ask for proof. Any of these would be perfectly reasonable lines of argument. What you can’t (reasonably) say, is that because I have never jumped off a cliff before no one could possibly say what would happen if I did (NB - this still holds true even if nobody had ever jumped off a cliff before in the whole of history).

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

Who looks a bit silly now!?

Everyone who voted for Brexit looks like a complete idiot now, not only have you utterly messed up the country you've atually made some crackpot DUP woman the Prime Minister and person in charge of Brexit.

Literally the whole world is pointing and laughing at you but hey, you won. Get over it.

[RingoMcCartney]

Everyone who voted for Brexit looks like a complete idiot now, not only have you utterly messed up the country you've atually made some crackpot DUP woman the Prime Minister and person in charge of Brexit.

Literally the whole world is pointing and laughing at you but hey, you won. Get over it.

"Literally the whole world is pointing and laughing at you"

Erm...... No it's not

[summitclaret]

One guess what Lancaster wants for Christmas?

[RingoMcCartney]

Still you, Ringo.

The facts don’t have to be about the belief (in the way you’re using the word).

Let me try once more with an analogy...

People jumping off cliffs have nothing to do with me, but the evidence taken from them jumping tells me it probably wouldn’t be fun if I tried it.

To make it even further removed from me jumping off a cliff, I could use the evidence that an egg breaks when I drop it on the floor, and extrapolate from that that I would hurt myself. Someone dropping an egg on the floor isn’t about me jumping off a cliff at all, is it? But you can use the information from one event as evidence as to what might happen as a result of a totally different event.

Now you might argue that an egg is much more fragile than I am, or that the floor is harder than the sand at the bottom of the cliff. You might also provide your own evidence of, say, a child’s toy surviving a drop from a 1st floor window unscathed. You could even say I made the egg-breaking story up and ask for proof. Any of these would be perfectly reasonable lines of argument. What you can’t (reasonably) say, is that because I have never jumped off a cliff before no one could possibly say what would happen if I did (NB - this still holds true even if nobody had ever jumped off a cliff before in the whole of history).

Really!? Are you boiling down the potential for ending human suffering and misery in such a facile way as to compare their plight to eggs dropping on the floor!

I could say that a horse running in the 2.30 tomorrow, based on the evidence of its previous outings, will win. If I went into the bookies at 2.15 to claim my winnings. What do you think the bookie would say!?

But that would be equally as facile.

We're talking about enormous events of national and global importance. Its complex. Far far more complex than trying to use silly analogies about jumping off cliffs.

[Greenmile]

...

"There’s plenty of stats out there that show that whether a country has free movement or not doesn’t affect the volume of people trafficking. In fact the countries with the worst people trafficking problems have no free movement."

Stats?

Are these countries in any way, shape or form like the island nation that is the UK.? Do they have the same border security that the UK has? And in what way will having increased border checks on cars, vans, lorrys and individuals NOT make it more difficult for the evil people traffickers to ply their trade?

Now this bit is relatively good. I don’t agree with you, but the last quoted paragraph is your evidence (or at least the assumed answers to your rhetorical questions would be).

You might even find some different correlation between the countries with people trafficking problems other than free movement and argue that’s the cause of their problems. That would be more evidence for your side.

I know I’m coming across as patronising and it’s not intentional, but for some mystifying reason I have a real wish to help you grasp this whole “evidence” thing.

[Bordeauxclaret]

I have a real wish to help you grasp this whole “evidence” thing.

Its a bit like Fr Ted trying to explain to Dougal which cows are small and which are far away.

[Greenmile]

Really!? Are you boiling down the potential for ending human suffering and misery in such a facile way as to compare their plight to eggs dropping on the floor!

No, Ringo. It’s an analogy.

The analogy doesn’t have to be as important as the thing it’s being used as an analogy for. Are talking pigs as important as the atrocities committed by Stalin? (you should read Animal Farm, too, if you haven’t already - it’s another good story)

[Greenmile]

Wait - are you just getting “evidence” mixed up with “proof”. That would make sense, I think.

[RingoMcCartney]

Now this bit is relatively good. I don’t agree with you, but the last quoted paragraph is your evidence (or at least the assumed answers to your rhetorical questions would be).

You might even find some different correlation between the countries with people trafficking problems other than free movement and argue that’s the cause of their problems. That would be more evidence for your side.

I know I’m coming across as patronising and it’s not intentional, but for some mystifying reason I have a real wish to help you grasp this whole “evidence” thing.

But it's not my evidence!!!!

I never once. Not once, said I had any. There is no EVIDENCE that the UK leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WILL help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

But, Martin said he did!

It was up to him to provide it. He didn't. He can't, and will be unable to, until we leave.

To go back to your facile analogies, there is no previous examples (evidence) of eggs and cliffs. When was the last time a densely populated island nation, that has a benefits system that acts as a magnet, that has a minimum wage, that has a health system free at point of contact, that has legislation that protects religious, ethnic and sexual minorities, left a socio political and economic bloc. And having done so, had it's impact on people trafficking, exploitation and slavery been assessed?

I'll tell you when. Never.

So there is no previous. There's no silly analogies about jumping off cliffs or eggs.

There is no EVIDENCE. Till we've left.

[Greenmile]

But it's not my evidence!!!!

I never once. Not once, said I had any. There is no EVIDENCE that the UK leaving the EU and ending free movement of people WILL help to stop exploitation and people trafficking and slavery.

But, Martin said he did!

It was up to him to provide it. He didn't. He can't, and will be unable to, until we leave.

To go back to your facile analogies, there is no previous examples (evidence) of eggs and cliffs. When was the last time a densely populated island nation, that has a benefits system that acts as a magnet, that has a minimum wage, that has a health system free at point of contact, that has legislation that protects religious, ethnic and sexual minorities, left a socio political and economic bloc. And having done so, had it's impact on people trafficking, exploitation and slavery been assessed?

I'll tell you when. Never.

So there is no previous. There's no silly analogies about jumping off cliffs or eggs.

There is no EVIDENCE. Till we've left.

Do you mean “proof”? If not, I give up.

I tried my best, though.

Edit - hang on. No I don’t.

See the bit in bold? That’s analogous to you saying “you can’t extrapolate from that egg breaking that a cliff jump will hurt you. The human body is far more complex and sturdy than a simple fragile egg. Look at all these facts about the human body that I will present as evidence that you’re wrong to make that assumption.”

That’s a reasonable argument.