Soft Brexit defeated

[Imploding Turtle]

Like I said, you dont understand the basics.

You really need to educate yourself.

We pay 350 million a week to the EU and get 150 million back.

Its not hard to understand

Is that the best you can do? We pay for membership therefore we're being raped and pillaged?

[Imploding Turtle]

I voted for him in the first one. £3. Price of a cheap pint to show what a shambles their system was.

If my one vote made the difference I would be seriously hacked off my myself at the moment.

But it didn't.

[Imploding Turtle]

Absolutely. However, the referendum which brought her to power was, according to Salmond, 'a once in a lifetime event' until they lost it. Now Sturgeon is pushing for a second one because all she wants is a legacy no matter how disastrous it is for the inbreds north of the border. And it will be.

It should have been a once in a lifetime event. But then Scotland were made certain promises in order to secure their No vote and one of those promises was continued membership of the EU. You can't expect to make promises in an election, get the result you want and then be freely able to break those promises without any consequences. If the UK had kept its promises then there wouldn't be any question of a second referendum any time soon.

I'm not saying you are, but if someone thinks it's OK to break promises made to secure a result, and then criticise the people to whom the promises were made when they're showing remarkable contempt for those agreived voters, and aren't interested in fair, honest politics.

The bottom line is promises were made to secure a No vote, and those promises were broken. Why shouldn't there be a second vote?

[Imploding Turtle]

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/07/e ... ck-corbyn/

How does that show that it was Tory voters that elected Corbyn?

[Imploding Turtle]

Hi IT, yes, I've got some memories of your explaining the SNP Scottish election manifesto - and, I guess, it was also in the recent UK General Election SNP manifesto. But, my point was that Ms Sturgeon has announced a change to her plans this week. She now wants a later indyref2. Where does the later date fir with the two manifesto commitments?

I don't know. Is there a date?

[Colburn_Claret]

Positivity won't rebuild our car industry - and certainly not overnight. There is being positive, and there is being naive. In addition to this we have a government who refuse to invest on the economy. They said as much during the election.

There's nothing naive about having faith in the British people, and why does it have to be the government investing in the economy. They need to nurture the economy so that it is ripe for people to invest and grow here. That doesn't have to be internal. International companies would line up to exploit the opportunities an independent Britain could offer. This bloody doom and gloom. I live in the same country as you, but I just don't see it. You live like a dog at the EU table, feeding off scraps, jumping when they say jump, having the lead yanked when you disagree. We can feed our bloody selves. Yes it will be different. Some individuals will lose out, others though will gain. At the end of it all its ludicrous to suggest we can't do just as well for ourselves without the dogma of Federalists.

[JohnMcGreal]

no matter how disastrous it is for the inbreds north of the border.

What a bell end.

[Damo]

I went with Labour and Leave, but I don't think this describes my position at all. We can renationalise whether or not, but yes, a key advantage of leaving would be relaxing the rules on state aid to industry. And not just our state, all states. I think there are many areas where the market simply cannot provide the answer to a problem, and EU rules become an obstacle.

I'll think of an imaginary example off the top of my head: Chagas disease is a crippling incurable condition. It affects millions in Latin America - and some tourists. The world desperately needs a vaccine. But vaccines rarely make a lot of money, because once it is given, no follow up treatment is required, and if poor people need it, they can't afford an expensive vaccine, so basically there'd be nothing in it for a private enterprise to develop one. Compare this to a new cardiac drug that might only carry a very marginal advantage over an existing one, but the treatment is lifelong and for wealthy customers.

Now it would be perfectly possible for the UK government to set up its own vaccine division, and spend the money and time to develop a Chagas vaccine. But it would be so much more efficient and cost effective to find an established pharmaceutical company to do it, and the state agree to help them with the task. But the EU, obsessed with the wisdom of free-markets and their anti state aid rules, essentially prevents this.

For me, Brexit should have been a calm, 15-year mission, where everyone would be as reasonable as possible, finalised with a friendly divorce on good terms. Instead we've got ourselves into a stupid situation where people like Damo are sending us hurtling towards a suicide mission, thinking it makes them look hard in the process, and without realising the EU could wipe the floor with us if they so choose. The whole thing is crazy, we should Remain.

This is what being completely detached from reality looks like

[Lancasterclaret]

Some individuals will lose out, others though will gain.

This is my problem

The individuals who will gain will be the rich and the very rich, the others who will lose out will be the poor and the very poor.

it was, and always will be (for quite a large number of people) a case of turkeys voting for Christmas.

[Spijed]

Some individuals will lose out, others though will gain. At the end of it all its ludicrous to suggest we can't do just as well for ourselves without the dogma of Federalists.

And because of the £350 million deliberate lie the NHS will be no better off once we leave.

Not a single person who wanted to leave the EU has been able to produce a single scrap of evidence to suggest the NHS will better off outside the EU.

You'd think someone might have been able to produce a report saying how well our hospitals can perform outside the strangle hold of Europe but they can't because it's financially impossible.

[Imploding Turtle]

What a bell end.

Bigotry against Scots is OK apparently.

[Right_winger]

And because of the £350 million deliberate lie the NHS will be no better off once we leave.

Not a single person who wanted to leave the EU has been able to produce a single scrap of evidence to suggest the NHS will better off outside the EU.

You'd think someone might have been able to produce a report saying how well our hospitals can perform outside the strangle hold of Europe but they can't because it's financially impossible.

The 350 million was misleading of course it was. The media though were in a lot of the way responsible for misleading the public. 350 million saved per week which could be spent on the NHS what is wrong with that? It doesn't mean it will all be spent. Just that we WILL be saving that money and it could potentially go towards the NHS.

the NHS will be better off outside the EU because of the amount of health tourists we receive who pay nada into its coffers, yet they help to overload it.

Just saying.

[CrosspoolClarets]

This is my problem

The individuals who will gain will be the rich and the very rich, the others who will lose out will be the poor and the very poor.

it was, and always will be (for quite a large number of people) a case of turkeys voting for Christmas.

That depends on whether ideologically you believe life is enhanced by having grit, courage and only a limited safety blanket. Today's youngsters are sorely lacking in the first two, and have too much of the last one. Life is far, far easier than it was for earlier generations, it's just also more envious because 24/7 media and the internet have made it so obvious where disparities are.

Brexit won't solve all that of course, but it is a necessary first step. I respect all those who see things in a different way, but there are reasons people with harder lives in other countries come here and use their excess of grit and courage to outflank Brits in employment and in business. They know what it's really like to have it hard, Latvians and the likes. It's an irony they are moving into the EU whilst we are moving out.

[JohnMcGreal]

That depends on whether ideologically you believe life is enhanced by having grit, courage and only a limited safety blanket. Today's youngsters are sorely lacking in the first two, and have too much of the last one. Life is far, far easier than it was for earlier generations

What a load of ******** that is.

You're entitled to your opinion that todays youngsters lack grit and courage (I completely disagree with that), but to say that they have life far, far easier than earlier generations is just completely untrue. Unless by earlier generations you mean the 19th century.

[Spijed]

That depends on whether ideologically you believe life is enhanced by having grit, courage and only a limited safety blanket. Today's youngsters are sorely lacking in the first two, and have too much of the last one. Life is far, far easier than it was for earlier generations

It was far easier to get on the property ladder than it is today. Young couples have absolutely no chance of owning their own home these days.

[Cryssys]

the NHS will be better off outside the EU because of the amount of health tourists we receive who pay nada into its coffers, yet they help to overload it.

Just saying.

The best information I can find says that the cost of health tourism is less than 1% of the total NHS budget so it is hardly bringing it to its knees.

On the other side of the coin, the NHS is heavily reliant on EU/migrant labour and we have already seen that it is becoming increasingly difficult to recruit key workers. Add to this that Brexit will put the UK economy under considerable pressure and that this will probably result in reduced NHS spending in real terms (this is government policy anyway).

Paying the Brexit divorce bill is set to cost tens of billions (30 – 80 depending on where you look) and this money will have to be found from somewhere. What do you bet that the NHS budget will be cut to fund this?

In light of the above it is difficult to understand your suggestion that the NHS will be better off outside the EU. Instead of focusing on a minor issue (health tourists) you need to consider the bigger picture before making sweeping generalisations.

[Colburn_Claret]

And because of the £350 million deliberate lie the NHS will be no better off once we leave.

Not a single person who wanted to leave the EU has been able to produce a single scrap of evidence to suggest the NHS will better off outside the EU.

You'd think someone might have been able to produce a report saying how well our hospitals can perform outside the strangle hold of Europe but they can't because it's financially impossible.

I don't know how many people, if any, voted leave because of £350 mill crap. Any one who voted Remain or voted Brexit, because of money is an idiot.
Economies fluctuate up and down, always have, always will do, whether we stayed in or opted out. Therefore voting one way or the other for some imagined short term gain is sad.
It was a far bigger picture for most. The ability to tighten our own belt, or slacken it, when it suited us. Being able to control our own destiny, regardless of any outside interference, was and always will be far more important. If the world economies slow, then so does the EU's, and so does ours. We're not protected from anything by being part of the EU. Living outside the EU we can make our own choices on how to deal with any economic climate change. That freedom puts us ahead of the pack, because the inflexibility of trying to run 20 odd economies at the same time, means so many people and countries fall through the gaps. You cannot have a one shoe fits all economic plan for so many diverse cultures and economies. It's incredible that anyone actually believes you can.

[Right_winger]

We aren't going to be paying an EU divorce bill. We do not owe the EU anything

[Spijed]

Any one who voted Remain or voted Brexit, because of money is an idiot.

So if it's not about money why does the amount we keep getting told we'll save by not being in the EU seem to be important for many people?

[Lancasterclaret]

That depends on whether ideologically you believe life is enhanced by having grit, courage and only a limited safety blanket. Today's youngsters are sorely lacking in the first two, and have too much of the last one. Life is far, far easier than it was for earlier generations, it's just also more envious because 24/7 media and the internet have made it so obvious where disparities are.

I don't even know where to start with this. Words fail me.

[Cryssys]

We aren't going to be paying an EU divorce bill. We do not owe the EU anything

If you believe that then you are more blinkered than I thought or believed possible. Of course there is a divorce bill.

[Right_winger]

If you believe that then you are more blinkered than I thought or believed possible. Of course there is a divorce bill.

Your calling me blinkered when you are believing the scare stories from those trying to subvert brexit.

Go on then why do we have to pay a bill?

[Colburn_Claret]

So if it's not about money why does the amount we keep getting told we'll save by not being in the EU seem to be important for many people?

I honestly don't know.
Trying to prove something possibly, I find it best to ignore. There's pros and cons to everything, this will be no different.

[Cryssys]

Your calling me blinkered when you are believing the scare stories from those trying to subvert brexit.

Go on then why do we have to pay a bill?

They are not scare stories. Try reading the papers, watching the news or doing some research yourself. If you type " EU divorce bill" into Google it will provide a huge number of links and information.

Even the most hard line Brexiters acknowledge that there will be a bill to pay. For you to believe otherwise is to deny the obvious.

[UpTheBeehole]

Go on then why do we have to pay a bill?

Go on then, why don't we have to pay a bill?

[Bacchus]

Your calling me blinkered when you are believing the scare stories from those trying to subvert brexit.

Go on then why do we have to pay a bill?

Because we signed up to a long term budget and we can't just walk away from those commitments whenever we feel like it. Even if you believe we should just stick two fingers up and disappear back across the Channel you might want to consider how refusing to honour that commitment might play out when we try to negotiate future arrangements with EU members. Then again, I guess you're one of the folk that think that if the EU don't do exactly what we tell them to it's because they hate us and are trying to punish us, so probably not a lot of point in trying to explain to you really.

[Right_winger]

Because we signed up to a long term budget and we can't just walk away from those commitments whenever we feel like it. Even if you believe we should just stick two fingers up and disappear back across the Channel you might want to consider how refusing to honour that commitment might play out when we try to negotiate future arrangements with EU members. Then again, I guess you're one of the folk that think that if the EU don't do exactly what we tell them to it's because they hate us and are trying to punish us, so probably not a lot of point in trying to explain to you really.

Actually we can just up and leave without paying for budgets after we leave.
Believing anything which comes from the EU regarding finances is very difficult considering they haven't had their accounts signed off for nigh on 20 years.
We should actually be due a refund from the EU but i bet you can guess how that conversation will go.

[Lancasterclaret]

No we shouldn't, but again you don't want to hear anything that contradicts your view of it.

[Darthlaw]

Clearly we're going to have to pay a divorce bill. Whether it's right to is a different matter, considering we won't be getting anything back in future or from our share of which we've contributed to the infrastructure of the EU. Nevertheless, we will definitely be paying them something to keep some sort of access to the single market.

It's a bit like splitting up with the wife and giving her the house, holiday home and car whilst also saying you're happy to pay your commitments towards the kids school fees, etc. You in turn get to run off with the 18 year old au pair who looks like a victorias secret model. A bit of financial pain but worth it for getting rid of the old hag, whilst making sure you can still see your kids.

[claretdom]

It's a bit like splitting up with the wife and giving her the house, holiday home and car whilst also saying you're happy to pay your commitments towards the kids school fees, etc. You in turn get to run off with the 18 year old au pair who looks like a victorias secret model. A bit of financial pain but worth it for getting rid of the old hag.

Had the leave campaign used this analogy the 52-48% result would have been more 90-10%

[Right_winger]

No we shouldn't, but again you don't want to hear anything that contradicts your view of it.

Why shouldn't we be due a refund? We have contributed massively to the EUs infustructure, it's only right that we are due our share of it back.

It's attitudes like yours which people are fed up with and have voted to leave in the first place.

I can understand politicians being dead against leaving the EU as that is their little retirement nest egg, but the ordinary person?

[JohnMcGreal]

Actually we can just up and leave without paying for budgets after we leave.

Ah yes, lets just show ourselves to be a completely unreliable and child-like country that doesn't honour it's financial commitments and responsibilities.

That's exactly what we need to be doing right before going it alone in the world, trying to persuade new countries to form trade agreements with us.

Left to the likes of you, the UK would be a global pariah.

[UpTheBeehole]

It's a bit like splitting up with the wife and giving her the house, holiday home and car whilst also saying you're happy to pay your commitments towards the kids school fees, etc. You in turn get to run off with the 18 year old au pair who looks like a victorias secret model. A bit of financial pain but worth it for getting rid of the old hag, whilst making sure you can still see your kids.

No, it's like splitting up with your wife to be single, but the way you handled your breakup in public means that everyone you know thinks you're a total knob and won't go near you. Sometimes you'll go home with a bit of a slapper, but it's nothing like what you used to have.

[Lancasterclaret]

It's attitudes like yours which people are fed up with and have voted to leave in the first place.

I'm sorry?

You are not listening to anyone who contradicts your view. Why should I bother wasting my time telling you how international agreements work, and what happens to countries that default on them?

I'll just get accused of being unpatriotic and "talking Britain down".

[Paul Waine]

I went with Labour and Leave, but I don't think this describes my position at all. We can renationalise whether or not, but yes, a key advantage of leaving would be relaxing the rules on state aid to industry. And not just our state, all states. I think there are many areas where the market simply cannot provide the answer to a problem, and EU rules become an obstacle.

I'll think of an imaginary example off the top of my head: Chagas disease is a crippling incurable condition. It affects millions in Latin America - and some tourists. The world desperately needs a vaccine. But vaccines rarely make a lot of money, because once it is given, no follow up treatment is required, and if poor people need it, they can't afford an expensive vaccine, so basically there'd be nothing in it for a private enterprise to develop one. Compare this to a new cardiac drug that might only carry a very marginal advantage over an existing one, but the treatment is lifelong and for wealthy customers.

Now it would be perfectly possible for the UK government to set up its own vaccine division, and spend the money and time to develop a Chagas vaccine. But it would be so much more efficient and cost effective to find an established pharmaceutical company to do it, and the state agree to help them with the task. But the EU, obsessed with the wisdom of free-markets and their anti state aid rules, essentially prevents this.

For me, Brexit should have been a calm, 15-year mission, where everyone would be as reasonable as possible, finalised with a friendly divorce on good terms. Instead we've got ourselves into a stupid situation where people like Damo are sending us hurtling towards a suicide mission, thinking it makes them look hard in the process, and without realising the EU could wipe the floor with us if they so choose. The whole thing is crazy, we should Remain.

Hi iibyw, I agree fully with you on the way the UK and the EU should be handling Brexit. It should be a calm and thoughtful withdrawal and the establishment of a new relationship, one that works for both the remaining members and for the departing member. Wiser politicians might have written the guidelines/rules for how a new relationship could work between the EU and any departing member when they agreed on Article 50. If they'd had the foresight, these rules would have provided for both net budget beneficiaries and new budget contributors, whoever was the departing member(s). I'd prefer the word "divorce" wasn't applied to the situation - none of the member states are married to each other - brexit is only the end of a partnership - and the opportunity for a new partnership.

I'm not sure your example of Chagas disease is a strong example of how the profit maximisation motive can operate in the pharmaceutical industry works. I'm also not sure that we can say that vaccines aren't profitable. Yes, if a disease/condition is eradicated then there will be no further use for that treatment that eradicated that disease or condition - but, think how fantastic any such discovery would be and think both how much it would do for the reputation for the pharm company and for its scientists. Then extend that to all the new opportunities that may arise from the knowledge of the understanding of the disease/condition and the knowledge and understanding of the treatment. Often a treatment can have more than one use. Many times the discovery of one treatment can open the possibility of other discoveries that can treat other diseases. And, as for vaccines in general, it can often be the case that a second generation and all subsequent generations also need to be vaccinated against the disease/condition. Yes, there are some examples where pharma companies have aimed to exploit generic drugs with enormous and unjustified price rises - and these should not be allowed to happen. That is why societies that operate capitalist economies have strong rules against monopolies and cartels.

I'd also suggest you think again about cardiovascular disease. I'm pretty certain it is not a disease of the wealthy. Yes, those of us with cardiovascular disease hope not only that we are taking our prescriptions "lifelong" but that we can also take them over a long life.

Of course, you already know that I'm not an advocate of the advantages of state ownership of the "means of production." But, the EU's prohibition isn't on the grounds of belief in free markets, but rather to manage the degree of competition between the firms within the member states.

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

We send the EU 350 million a week
Let's spend that money on Northern Ireland instead

[Darthlaw]

No, it's like splitting up with your wife to be single, but the way you handled your breakup in public means that everyone you know thinks you're a total knob and won't go near you. Sometimes you'll go home with a bit of a slapper, but it's nothing like what you used to have.

Unlikely the women ignore you when you've got one of the fattest wallets in the room but hey, some of us are confident and get the good looking women. Some of us are timid, look across at the other guys with envy, take anything we can get and wish for the good old days of being married to the woman who took control of their wage (giving them a little spending money), stop them seeing their mates who they didn't want us to see and generally decided what they did every second of the day.

I've changed my mind, take me back EU...

[Paul Waine]

Why do some people think the UK signed up to long term budgets? The EU had a multi-year budget process, the current budget runs to 2020. If the UK leaves at the end of March 2019 then there are only a few months left of this budget period.

So, far as I'm aware, Article 50 says nothing about contributions continuing beyond the period that a member state is a member. Similarly, it says nothing about the continuation of contributions to a member state that had been a net beneficiary before leaving.

I can see an argument for contributing towards pensions and similar deferred obligations - though only because these are really obligations that were built up during the membership period, but I don't the EU budget process recognised pensions during each budget period.

I can also see a logical argument, that if obligations continue after leaving, then there should also be a right to a share of the assets built up during the period of membership.

I can also see a reason for the UK government to be magnanimous in agreeing a generous settlement. Maybe we could agree to maintain the same net annual contributions through a transitional period, maybe this transitional period could be five years long - so, the total settlement would be around £50 billion. But, I'd imagine to reach this agreement and for both the UK electorate and the EU and the 27 member states to be happy with this agreement we would need (1) agreement on the EU citizens in the UK and the UK citizens in the EU; (2) the ending of freedom of movement; (3) a new trade agreement that would provide the benefits of free trade with the single market, (4) agreement on city/financial services passporting and euro clearing and (5) no jurisdiction by the ECJ.

There was a report in the Times this week that the EU27 are already starting to argue between themselves about how the loss of the UK's contribution will be handled: some want the other new contributors to pay in more, others want the budgets to be cut, there are suggestions that the French farm subsidises will finally be cut back.

[BennyD]

What a bell end.

So finally, we do have something in common.

[BennyD]

What a load of ******** that is.

You're entitled to your opinion that todays youngsters lack grit and courage (I completely disagree with that), but to say that they have life far, far easier than earlier generations is just completely untrue. Unless by earlier generations you mean the 19th century.

No it isn't; as a child, I didn't have central heating, a phone (either landline or mobile) TV, computer, and most mornings walked 2+ miles to school and back in all weathers. I appreciate the convenience of modern life brings its own pressures but as a teenager I would have swapped lifestyles in a millisecond.

[BennyD]

Bigotry against Scots is OK apparently.

For once I agree with you.

[Imploding Turtle]

For once I agree with you.

I just remember how upset you'd get when anyone was remotely anti-English.

You come across as being nothing but a bigoted mistake of a Scotsman, but I suppose that's PC because you aren't English. Btw, the cross border kerfuffle has been going on long before Margaret Thatcher and there is probably more hatred North of the Border than South of it. If you must blame something, and being Scottish you obviously must, blame the shenanigans before, during and after Colluden.

Well, vote out then and stop bleating about the English. However, put your cross in the leave box and then you would be voting to head 'Scotland in a terrible direction socially and economically', but you are too bigoted, or too stupid, to see the big picture. Out of the U.K, out of the EU, no currency of your own, the wealthiest moving south to avoid the necessarily swingeing taxation, no real industry, falling oil stocks and no hand outs from Westminster. How is that going to end badly? Answers on a postcard to anyone who gives a sh!t because I certainly don't.

NCClaret, don't waste your breath mate, EversheddyEddie is a raging dickhead and he's been on my ignore list for some time. He hates anything, everything English and the armed forces with a passion. The scary thing is, he's supposed to be a teacher so Christ alone knows what he's telling the kids.

[Imploding Turtle]

No it isn't; as a child, I didn't have central heating, a phone (either landline or mobile) TV, computer, and most mornings walked 2+ miles to school and back in all weathers. I appreciate the convenience of modern life brings its own pressures but as a teenager I would have swapped lifestyles in a millisecond.

Think about the difference in the number of years between today's teenagers and when you were a teenager. Now subtract that number from the years during which you were a teenager and know that the teenagers before you would have been equally as quick to swap lifestyles.

[UpTheBeehole]

No it isn't; as a child, I didn't have central heating, a phone (either landline or mobile) TV, computer, and most mornings walked 2+ miles to school and back in all weathers. I appreciate the convenience of modern life brings its own pressures but as a teenager I would have swapped lifestyles in a millisecond.

Maybe if you'd have had a modern upbringing you wouldn't have such a bitter and outdated outlook on the world.

[BennyD]

Think about the difference in the number of years between today's teenagers and when you were a teenager. Now subtract that number from the years during which you were a teenager and know that the teenagers before you would have been equally as quick to swap lifestyles.

So we agree then; the youth of today do have it easier than the youth of yesteryears.

[Right_winger]

Why do some people think the UK signed up to long term budgets? The EU had a multi-year budget process, the current budget runs to 2020. If the UK leaves at the end of March 2019 then there are only a few months left of this budget period.

Because they believe what the left leaning media outlets are telling them.

To a lot of people they see the EU as some sort of protector of the people against any nasty British government, as such they will vehemently defend it.

[BennyD]

I just remember how upset you'd get when anyone was remotely anti-English.

About as upset as McGreal is about anti-Scots remarks. Why should I always have to retaliate? Occasionally I like to get it in first because I know what's coming.

[BennyD]

Maybe if you'd have had a modern upbringing you wouldn't have such a bitter and outdated outlook on the world.

Bitter? Swing and a miss. If you knew my present circumstances, you'd be bitter not me.

[UpTheBeehole]

Bitter? Swing and a miss. If you knew my present circumstances, you'd be bitter not me.

What, because you got the cheap houses, pay rises, final salary pensions and signed it all off by screwing everything up for every generation after yours?

[Imploding Turtle]

So we agree then; the youth of today do have it easier than the youth of yesteryears.

Only if you're comparing your difficulties then with how you imagine your difficulties would measure up now. You fail to consider the possibility that there are different difficulties now that you didn't have to face.