Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[hampsteadclaret]

nil..before you or any of your pals start,.. remember that Italy went into recession last week, and last time I looked Italy wasn't doing it's own southern European version of Brexit.

A lot of EU countries are not far from recession.

Mark Carney...yes..his opinions are something I look out for avidly.

[Colburn_Claret]

So I’m getting from that that you think regions should be independent / autonomous if that’s what they want. Fair enough but how far do we stretch that principle?

How about cities or towns (Greater Manchester, say, or Burnley, or Colburn)? How about individual streets or even houses? That would involve even less lost sovereignty. If you live on your own and your house is an independent state, that’s the only way you can have 100% sovereignty, but you’d probably be pretty poor as well.

Then you go down to streets, down to houses, down to the individual.
No man is an island, everybody relies on somebody for something from producing food to building maintaining roads. That's why we have governments and government departments. We are stronger for being together. Britain is stronger with Scotland as part of the Union. But it has to be a voluntary union, as soon as you impose the union then civil unrest follows as sure as night follows day.

The majority of the country now fear that they are going to have that union with the EU imposed on them. It doesn't matter which side of the fence you sit on, that isn't right. I disagree with people who want to stay in the EU, although I can understand their worries given the bias of the media, and the rhetoric coming from Brussels. It still doesn't justify, and nothing ever will, Anybody ignoring the result of the referendum.

[Lancasterclaret]

Why would anyone who used google search more than once fear that EU union is going to be forced upon them?

I want to know where you get your stuff from. Its pretty out there it has to be said.

[nil_desperandum]

nil..before you or any of your pals start,..

Not started / starting anything, it was your post.
Don't try to drag me into it. It's difficult enough keeping pace with the posts from Ringo, and a couple of others without engaging with you. Most of your posts are serious, and worth debating but it's more entertaining following the "duplicate posts" in the Ringo skirmishes.

[Bacchus]

Sure it will, and throw in its lot with JC!
This is why May didn't need to bribe them in the first place. The DUP are never going to "get into bed" with Corbyn.
They'll just ask May for more money in order to ensure their continued support and she'll comply.
Leaving brexit aside. We're in a terrible state when we are continually held to ransom by that group of bigots and extremists.

We aren't being held to ransom. The Tory party are. They are just using our money to pay the ransom demands.

In years to come people will look back at Theresa May as the PM who bribed and brown nosed a small group of religious fundamentalists with public money purely so that she could stay in 'power' for long enough to finish the job of tearing the country apart. If there's been a single PM in history with worse judgement than May I'd be very surprised - and given what her predecessor did that's quite an accolade.

[summitclaret]

Macron thinks Italy's actions are the most provocative since Ww2. Bhf seal the borders quick with the hardest technology not yet available.

If he is not happy now, wait until the populists get control more widely across europe. He is an arrogant upstart.

[nil_desperandum]

If there's been a single PM in history with worse judgement than May I'd be very surprised - and given what her predecessor did that's quite an accolade.

Good post.
History will be the judge. Ultimately Cameron might just pip her at the post for causing the ****-storm and then running away from the consequences.
Both would of course quickly be eclipsed should Johnson manage to replace May at No. 10.

[summitclaret]

Which side would an EU army be on? Ask Merkel.

Can see it now. French foreign legion advancing with a " you can't stop us you are part Schengen" banner.

[summitclaret]

Or maybe the troops would alternate daily between their national and EU bosses.

[hampsteadclaret]

Not started / starting anything, it was your post.
Don't try to drag me into it. It's difficult enough keeping pace with the posts from Ringo, and a couple of others without engaging with you. Most of your posts are serious, and worth debating but it's more entertaining following the "duplicate posts" in the Ringo skirmishes.

Sorry nil..I didn't intend it to be aggressive. I addressed it to you as you're the most reasonable of them.

I put the link up early before somebody else did, and then started telling us that a dodgy economic growth outlook was totally the fault of Brexit.

[hampsteadclaret]

Good post.
History will be the judge. Ultimately Cameron might just pip her at the post for causing the ****-storm and then running away from the consequences.
Both would of course quickly be eclipsed should Johnson manage to replace May at No. 10.

God forbid Johnson gets the call...an oaf and a waster.

Six months ago on here I said it would be Gove, and I think I'll stick with that.

[RingoMcCartney]

LOL the hypocrisy!!

Come on Ringo it’s a simple question, what is your definition of evidence? I keep posting what I think it is but you never say what your definition is and the more I ask the more you squirm.

As can be seen further back up the thread. I gave you your own definition back. As it was perfectly adequate as a definition.

It was -

"Evidence is the available body of facts or information indicating whether a proposition is true or valid"


But your attention craving has now got the better of you.

None of the examples you gave were "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk. 

They were conjecture and opinions based on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumptions and forecasts and short termism.

Squirming!? Don't flatter yourself tiger.

[Lancasterclaret]

So we've got a diplomatic spat between Italy and France, and the non-existent (except in the minds of the Brexiteers) EU army marching to sort it out.

Standard I reckon.

[RingoMcCartney]

The evidence proves that Brexit is negative for Britain now, today. I’m not offering an opinion on the future, i’m telling you the impact of Brexit now. As I said, opinion of potential sunlit uplands don’t mean a thing to people being impacted now.

Your still the remoaner on the plane that's experienced a few lumps and bumps while taxiing on the runway before taking off, and is now shrieking,

"that's evidence of a certain crash.!!!!"

Your still the weather girl claiming to be a climatologist

[android]

Brexit uncertainty doesn’t exist without Brexit, so it’s an effect of Brexit however you look at it.

Then we are agreed Martin - the uncertainty over Brexit has had a negative effect. As to whether Brexit itself will have a negative effect - none of us know, as we don't even know whether it will happen yet, never mind how.

[Lancasterclaret]

Crikey andriod, there are fair few Brexiteers losing the certainty that brexit won't happen.

To us remainers, it looks even more likely that we crash out without a deal.

Guess it depends on how and what you read.

[summitclaret]

So we've got a diplomatic spat between Italy and France, and the non-existent (except in the minds of the Brexiteers) EU army marching to sort it out.

Standard I reckon.

It was obviously a what if question and a bit of poke at the 27 being so so united.

Still think may is wasting time by not speaking formally with Merkel and Macron.

[martin_p]

Your still the remoaner on the plane that's experienced a few lumps and bumps while taxiing on the runway before taking off, and is now shrieking,

"that's evidence of a certain crash.!!!!"

Your still the weather girl claiming to be a climatologist

Presumably you think climatologists only have opinions. Or do you accept that their predictions for the future are based on a body of evidence and models refined over a number of years. Or (as I suspect) do you think global warming is ‘Project Fear’ because it snowed last week.

[Burnley Ace]

As can be seen further back up the thread. I gave you your own definition back. As it was perfectly adequate as a definition.

It was -

"Evidence is the available body of facts or information indicating whether a proposition is true or valid"


But your attention craving has now got the better of you.

None of the examples you gave were "evidence" that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk. 

They were conjecture and opinions based on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumptions and forecasts and short termism.

Squirming!? Don't flatter yourself tiger.

You can deny it all you want - you’re squirming!! Don’t repeat my definition, what’s yours? Tick tock Ringo you must have a dictionary somewhere! You can’t answer a straight question

[RingoMcCartney]

Presumably you think climatologists only have opinions. Or do you accept that THEIR PREDICTIONS for the future are based on a body of evidence and models refined over a number of years. Or (as I suspect) do you think global warming is ‘Project Fear’ because it snowed last week.

The key word is PREDICTIONS.

They're based on PAST evidence.

But they are only predictions. They may well materialise.

What do you base your predictions that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk, on?

Because nobody has left the EU before.

You can have -

supposition,

presupposition,

presumption,

premise,

belief,

expectation,

conjecture,

speculation,

surmise,

guess,

theory,

hypothesis

, postulation,

, inference

thought,

, projections

scenarios given varying criteria,

and an opinion based on short term fluctuations and events.

You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

[Lancasterclaret]

They are united on the backstop though Summit.

[martin_p]

The key word is PREDICTIONS.

They're based on PAST evidence.

But they are only predictions.

What do you base your predictions that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk, on?

Because nobody has left the EU before.

You cannot take EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

But presumably you accept the predictions of the experts in weather and climate are more valid than the average man in the street?

[Burnley Ace]

Presumably you think climatologists only have opinions. Or do you accept that their predictions for the future are based on a body of evidence and models refined over a number of years. Or (as I suspect) do you think global warming is ‘Project Fear’ because it snowed last week.

It’s taken sometime but I suspect that he thinks that opinion and evidence are mutually exclusive

If I were to say the sun will rise tomorrow he would bleat (in block capitals) that’s just opinion, it’s in the future, we’re your evidence! Yes it is an opinion backed up by over a million years worth of evidence!!

[RingoMcCartney]

You can deny it all you want - you’re squirming!! Don’t repeat my definition, what’s yours? Tick tock Ringo you must have a dictionary somewhere! You can’t answer a straight question

Im genuinely tempted to call you an idiot.














But why the hell should I give you a promotion?

[RingoMcCartney]

But presumably you accept the predictions of the experts in weather and climate are more valid than the average man in the street?

Absolutely!

But they are PREDICTIONS!

Your words.

They are not evidence.


You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

[RingoMcCartney]

It’s taken sometime but I suspect that he thinks that opinion and evidence are mutually exclusive

If I were to say the sun will rise tomorrow he would bleat (in block capitals) that’s just opinion, it’s in the future, we’re your evidence! Yes it is an opinion backed up by over a million years worth of evidence!!

Take a photograph of tomorrow's sunrise.

But as evidence.

Post it on here.








today.

TICK TOCK...........

[martin_p]

Absolutely!

But they are PREDICTIONS!

Your words.

They are not evidence.


You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

So you’ll therefore accept that it has to be a serious concern that the vast majority of economic experts are predicting varying degrees of hard times after Brexit. That experts on exports and trade saying Brexit is going to be a disaster is similar cause for concern?

[martin_p]

Absolutely!

But they are PREDICTIONS!

Your words.

They are not evidence.


You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

No, but you can provide evidence that an event will happen. And you can use that evidence to give you (as close as makes no difference) 100% confidence that your prediction is correct. Now I’m not of course claiming that anything to do with Brexit can be predicted with that level of certainty, but the number of experts predicting gloom should be enough to make even the most ardent Brexiteers sit up and think.

[RingoMcCartney]

So you’ll therefore accept that it has to be a serious concern that the vast majority of economic experts are predicting varying degrees of hard times after Brexit. That experts on exports and trade saying Brexit is going to be a disaster is similar cause for concern?

Again, I accept they are PREDICTING hard times/disaster.

However, we have not left yet, nor has a country ever left the EU in the past. So they have no evidence just supposition, presupposition, presumption, premise, belief, expectation, conjecture, speculation, surmise, guess, theory, hypothesis, postulation, conclusion, deduction, inference, thought, suspicion, assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, assumptions and forecasts .

You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

[Burnley Ace]

Absolutely!

But they are PREDICTIONS!

Your words.

They are not evidence.


You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

Just for clarity what you are saying is:

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE SUN WILL RISE TOMORROW.

[aggi]

Presumably you think climatologists only have opinions. Or do you accept that their predictions for the future are based on a body of evidence and models refined over a number of years. Or (as I suspect) do you think global warming is ‘Project Fear’ because it snowed last week.

I think it's been pretty obvious for a long time that Ringo does not believe you can predict anything that will happen in the future.

Sun coming up in the morning, what happens when you drop an apple, what the result of turning the kettle full of water on will be, etc. You can guess what will happen but until it's actually happened then anything could happen, regardless of what the science may say.

It's a weird way to understand the world but at least he's consistent.

[SingaporeClarets]

Presumably you think climatologists only have opinions. Or do you accept that their predictions for the future are based on a body of evidence and models refined over a number of years. Or (as I suspect) do you think global warming is ‘Project Fear’ because it snowed last week.

I had a climatology lecturer who said that what he says and does is like a bikini.

What he is saying is interesting but what he is concealing was vital.

[RingoMcCartney]

. Now I’m not of course claiming that anything to do with Brexit can be predicted with that level of certainty.

Nor am I.

So you and I are both left with what I said originally

Our own opinion.

That we're both entitled to hold.

[RingoMcCartney]

Just for clarity what you are saying is:

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE SUN WILL RISE TOMORROW.

No.

I'm saying that for time immemorial the sun HAS risen in the morning.

I'm saying you and I can PREDICT it will do the same tomorrow.

You cannot provide EVIDENCE that it did, till it has happened.

So once again I'll ask you.

Take a photograph of tomorrow's sunrise.

But as evidence.

Post it on here.








today.

Run along now

TICK TOCK......

[RingoMcCartney]

I think it's been pretty obvious for a long time that Ringo does not believe you can predict anything that will happen in the future.
.

Wrong.

People can make predictions about whatever they like.

But until an event actually happens, it's impossible to say whether or not those predictions were correct.

Till it does they remain just predictions.

You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has not yet happened.

The assumption that takes a PREDICTION to be EVIDENCE is a weird way to understand the world.

[nil_desperandum]

God forbid Johnson gets the call...an oaf and a waster.

Six months ago on here I said it would be Gove, and I think I'll stick with that.

I'm afraid you're right.
He's played a much smarter game than Johnson, and his strategic duplicitous manoeuvres have put him into the box-seat. Hopefully people will see through his facade. In some ways I'd rather have someone who is consistent and has the courage to back their own convictions - even when I disagree with them.

[Rowls]

Latest cringeworthy stunts from twitter:

https://twitter.com/peoplesvote_uk/stat ... 0105263105" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://twitter.com/LeedsEurope/status/ ... 9950997504" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[JBCLARETS]

https://youtu.be/qL4XU5EAurM" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RingoMcCartney]

https://youtu.be/qL4XU5EAurM

Brilliant!!!

[Erasmus]

Ringo, in philosophy there are different types of evidence. In some cases evidence is accepted as absolute proof, in others it is accepted that the conclusion is a likely outcome based on the strength of the premises. Evidence doesn't have to give absolute certainty, there are gradations of certainty.

And Rowls, are you still a climate-change denier, or have you changed your mind on that? I ask that without any malice at all as one has to regard the ability to change one's mind as evidence of a degree of self-abnegation and hence wisdom.

[hampsteadclaret]

I always preferred this earlier version of TUSK myself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrRVW-p8SJ8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

3000 posts in, all quality no rubbish..

[RingoMcCartney]

Ringo, in philosophy there are different types of evidence. In some cases evidence is accepted as absolute proof, in others it is accepted that the conclusion is a likely outcome based on the strength of the premises. Evidence doesn't have to give absolute certainty, there are gradations of certainty..

I dare say what you're saying is true.

But is the uk leaving the EU a philosophical proposition?

Or is it a political/ economic (insert other) event.?

With so many potential variables, in my opinion. What Remoaners are claiming as "evidence" is still only an opinion based on supposition, presupposition, presumption, premise, belief, expectation, conjecture, speculation, surmise, guess, theory, hypothesis, postulation, conclusion, deduction, inference, thought, suspicion on assumptions, projections, scenarios given varying criteria, predictions, forecasts and and short term events.

[Damo]

To us remainers, it looks even more likely that we crash out without a deal.

It's finally dawned on remainers you mean.
Most Brexiteers have seen no deal coming a mile off, despite many remainers saying MP's would never allow it.

The odds of no deal have dropped from 3/1 to 2/1 btw. Still time to make a few quid

[Rowls]

It's finally dawned on remainers you mean.
Most Brexiteers have seen no deal coming a mile off, despite many remainers saying MP's would never allow it.

The odds of no deal have dropped from 3/1 to 2/1 btw. Still time to make a few quid

The negotiations stage is always going to appear that the UK is in difficulty because we have to justify breaking the status quo.

Only when Brexit formally happens will the EU have to justify their hand, and their individual nation states and their private enterprises may just well do so.

Personally I think the EU has massively overplayed its hand.

It will only become apparent after Brexit is finalized though.

[SingaporeClarets]

Corbyns in a win win situation with his plan.

Leave the EU which satisfies the views of those who agree with his opposition to the capitalist construct of the EU

Stay in the Common Market and allow free movement of people which is essentially staying in the EU without any voting rights which will satisfy the views of his remain supporting back benchers. However clearly there is no point in leaving the EU if this is what we intended to do.

He can't lose and to be honest it's either this or hard Brexit.

However I can't see the government backing any idea that gives him a win win solution which leaves only one logical conclusion. The sun will not rise on 29 March.

[Taffy on the wing]

The key word is PREDICTIONS.

They're based on PAST evidence.

But they are only predictions. They may well materialise.

What do you base your predictions that brexit will have a negative impact on the uk, on?

Because nobody has left the EU before.

You can have -

supposition,

presupposition,

presumption,

premise,

belief,

expectation,

conjecture,

speculation,
TROLL TROLL TROLL TROLL.......ALL DAY LONG!.............BORING!
surmise,

guess,

theory,

hypothesis

, postulation,

, inference

thought,

, projections

scenarios given varying criteria,

and an opinion based on short term fluctuations and events.

You cannot provide EVIDENCE from an event that has no yet happened.

TROLL TROLL TROLL TROLL........ALL DAY LONG..............BORING!

[RingoMcCartney]

TROLL TROLL TROLL TROLL........ALL DAY LONG..............BORING!

[ClaretAndJew]

Ringo, are you one of those people who doesn't believe in gravity because "it's only a theory" ?

[Erasmus]

Ringo, of course leaving the EU is not an abstract concept, but nonetheless the idea that there can only be evidence if it provides incontrovertible proof is unsustainable. It is the evidence based on inference which can indeed be surmised rather than conclusively proved. It is not that we know that leaving the EU will harm the country economically, but based on inference there is certainly a possibility that it will be the case. So it is taking a risk with our national welfare and I can't see what it is that we will gain even if the risk produces no adverse results.

The problem with all these debates is that remainers are generally basing their arguments on pragmatic reasoning, whilst leavers base their ideas on ideological considerations, particularly those related to nationalism. So the arguments tend to get nowhere as there is that fundamental divide in the reasoning. Personally, I am very much of a pragmatist as I regard ideology and nationalism as having value only in terms of the tangible results they produce in relation to the well being of the population, and particularly the less well off sections of that population.

[Burnley Ace]

You cannot provide EVIDENCE that it did, till it has happened.

TICK TOCK......

You accept that evidence is “the available body of facts indicating whether a belief is true”. Let’s break it down into little steps -

1. Is there an “available body of facts” - yes, the sun has risen ever day

2. Does that available body of facts indicate (be a sign of or strongly suggest) that the “belief” that the sun will rise tomorrow “is true” - Yes

Ergo that is EVIDENCE that the sun will rise tomorrow.

What’s your explanation?