2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain
Re: 2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain
I always said the original referendum wasn't designed in the national interest it was designed to unite the Tories under Cameron. The question was to simplistic. Much more detailed debate was required and some of the facts that are coming out now should have been factored into the question to include a third and maybe fourth option so we would have got a true vote. I voted out however I would support another vote and attempt to get something of a half way house aka Norway Switzerland etc.
These 2 users liked this post: Lancasterclaret boatshed bill
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: 2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain
Which is why I think we have to back the mis-match proposal from May at the moment.
Its not good at all, but it might stop this stuff continuing its corrosive drive for a bit.
All I do know is that its opened Pandoras box and there is still a lot more to come out.
Its not good at all, but it might stop this stuff continuing its corrosive drive for a bit.
All I do know is that its opened Pandoras box and there is still a lot more to come out.
This user liked this post: bfcjg
-
- Posts: 508
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:13 pm
- Been Liked: 238 times
- Has Liked: 157 times
Re: 2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain
Do you mean Italy, Hungary, Netherlands, Sweden, Greece, for starters ?Lancasterclaret wrote:All I do know is that its opened Pandoras box and there is still a lot more to come out.





Re: 2.7 Million Brexiteers Have Changed to Remain
I hope you had a good holiday.Paul Waine wrote:Hi Andrew, I've been away for 2 weeks - I don't post when I'm on holiday.
Yes, I know that it is "accepted" left wing view that that is what Thatcher did. It is probably also true that it was only "shutting down" firms (not "industries") that had failed to "keep up" and had long since been "uncompetitive." Maybe Thatcher would never have been PM if an earlier government had taken some of those "difficult" or "corrageous" (choose your own adjective) and allowed failing firms to fail and new firms to emerge much sooner - just like in a number of other European economies.
Improvements in living standards come from moving forward - and not holding on to the past, whether it is in technology - or the jobs we do.
In my opinion Thatcher fundamentally weakened Britain by subjecting elements of the economy to market forces, without having any kind of plan for how to deal with the problems that arose as a result. At the same time deregulating the financial services market - or in other words turning it into a self serving casino (laying the foundations for the 2008 crash - which I agree Labour could have mitigated by reversing some of her deregulation), and reducing the ability of the state to be progressive by cutting taxes on the rich (and I’m yet to be persuaded by trickle down economics).
So going back to your original point, I say again that you were in the right place at the right time to benefit from Thatcher’s government, however there were many other people, no less worthy than you who didn’t enjoy the same good fortune.