Politics, politics, politics

[scaramanga]

It's not even as deep as that.
If you voted Brexit, you voted for the Tories to deliver it. And even a modicum of political knowledge leads to the conclusion that the current position was possible.
So a vote for Brexit WAS a vote for what we currently have.
And people knew what they were voting for, ergo they voted for this.
People need to take ownership of their votes.

I voted remain but I'm arguing for brexit.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

I think that if the EU would, apparently, quite happily forget it ever happened - rather than insist on renegotiated terms - suggests we may be in a stronger position than many remainers here would have us believe.

Bingo we have a winner.

Really all the EU care about is getting money, whether we have full membership or part membership or a fee to access their good and service they do not care. The is no real true ideology amongst them accept to take as much money from us as they can.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

Are we going to do that dance again? The one where you fly off and start responding to points that havent been made? ;O)

Go back through the 652 pages and you will see a distinct narrative forming around remainers. It has a few facets, but one of them is that basically we are fudged without the EU, they are everything to us, but we dont make a difference to them and they will just carry on building eutopia without us.

Now, consider that position. We say we will leave. Do the EU say:

a) Off you go then, good luck.
b) If you wanted to stay you would have to come in on a full membership, no special treatment, or
c) If you want to pretend like nothing happened, thats absolutely fine?

a) would support the remainer view of the EU being bullet proof and us being stuffed.
b) would support the EU making the most of their position to strengthen the union going forward.
c) would suggest that maybe, just maybe, the remainers view on the EUs strength of position is not quite what they think it is. IE, as I actually said "suggests we may be in a stronger position than many remainers here would have us believe"

Look at what has happened, not your ideology or dogma, what does it say? For the EU to welcome us back with no change at all says to me they know they are much better off with us. It says we do actually have hand in these negotiations.

Frankly Im surprised they didnt go with b, I fully expected they would try and capitalise on the situation. Then, as I think of it, its also just as likely Barnier is fudging with us. I wouldnt put it past him to sow discord before the next round.



See above, read the point actually made.

Stronger than remainers would have us believe. Its a simple sentence, it shouldnt take much explanation.

And yes, I did argue they wouldnt let us back in on the old terms. And I still think thats the case.
I did also think they wouldnt let us stay in on the old terms, I thought they would take it as a chance to finally have us fully integrate, but it appears not.
Which is why I suggest we might have a larger hand to play than remainers would like to think.

Well straight after we voted out they said that the EU would have one taxation system and a national army. Things that they said just a few weeks before were not on the agenda. If the tories rooster up leaving and we stay in, then the will be carnage in this country and any future referendum would not even be a close run thing. Work to 70 to get your state pension but the French get theirs at 60 despite paying the same tax, hmmm. Part of me would love to see it because it would kill the EU for good.

Think the Greeks hate the EU for telling them how to behave(the greeks should have gone bankrupt and dealt with it themselves) it would be far worse in this country.

 

[StephenH]

It's not even as deep as that.
If you voted Brexit, you voted for the Tories to deliver it. And even a modicum of political knowledge leads to the conclusion that the current position was possible.
So a vote for Brexit WAS a vote for what we currently have.
And people knew what they were voting for, ergo they voted for this.
People need to take ownership of their votes.

That is funny.
There are so many who 'thought' they knew. But could never have seen how bizarre it was going to be sorting it out and frankly who could have ever predicted such a shambles.
Its an expensive fudge. I would have thought both remainers and leavers are unhappy for differing reasons.

It has though pleasingly kept me amused as predicted playing out like a great episode of The Thick of It!

 

[StephenH]

Bingo we have a winner.

Really all the EU care about is getting money, whether we have full membership or part membership or a fee to access their good and service they do not care. The is no real true ideology amongst them accept to take as much money from us as they can.

Its was always about Money surly EVERYBODY knew at least that much?

 

[SpurMeUp]

It's not even as deep as that.
If you voted Brexit, you voted for the Tories to deliver it. And even a modicum of political knowledge leads to the conclusion that the current position was possible.
So a vote for Brexit WAS a vote for what we currently have.
And people knew what they were voting for, ergo they voted for this.
People need to take ownership of their votes.

I'm not sure I agree. How could people possibly know all the detail and ramifications? About Ireland, trade, about Farrage essentially being in it for a job and attention...about the pictures of immigrants lining up being a fabrication, about the 350 for the NHS and the numbers which are likely the polar opposite - that being out the EU will cost the UK circa 350m a week. How could they possibly know that, when people with economics and politics degrees didn't?

 

[DTA]

Are we going to do that dance again? The one where you fly off and start responding to points that havent been made? ;O)

Go back through the 652 pages and you will see a distinct narrative forming around remainers. It has a few facets, but one of them is that basically we are fudged without the EU, they are everything to us, but we dont make a difference to them and they will just carry on building eutopia without us.

Now, consider that position. We say we will leave. Do the EU say:

a) Off you go then, good luck.
b) If you wanted to stay you would have to come in on a full membership, no special treatment, or
c) If you want to pretend like nothing happened, thats absolutely fine?

a) would support the remainer view of the EU being bullet proof and us being stuffed.
b) would support the EU making the most of their position to strengthen the union going forward.
c) would suggest that maybe, just maybe, the remainers view on the EUs strength of position is not quite what they think it is. IE, as I actually said "suggests we may be in a stronger position than many remainers here would have us believe"

Look at what has happened, not your ideology or dogma, what does it say? For the EU to welcome us back with no change at all says to me they know they are much better off with us. It says we do actually have hand in these negotiations.

Frankly Im surprised they didnt go with b, I fully expected they would try and capitalise on the situation. Then, as I think of it, its also just as likely Barnier is fudging with us. I wouldnt put it past him to sow discord before the next round.



See above, read the point actually made.

Stronger than remainers would have us believe. Its a simple sentence, it shouldnt take much explanation.

And yes, I did argue they wouldnt let us back in on the old terms. And I still think thats the case.
I did also think they wouldnt let us stay in on the old terms, I thought they would take it as a chance to finally have us fully integrate, but it appears not.
Which is why I suggest we might have a larger hand to play than remainers would like to think.

No one is disputing that the EU is better off with us in it. What you repeatedly fail to understand are these very simple facts:

A) the EU is bigger than us and holds the majority of the cards.
B) their priority if we do leave, is to give us a worse deal then if we were to stay.

Now once you understand and accept A) and B).we can move on to C and D which is about the results of the negociations:

C) they will take the financial pain of us leaving on terms that hurt us both, for the political capital that having uk in economy in flames will bring them.

Or

D) they give us super soft Brexit - which means that nothing much changes except that we are slightly worse off have slightly less power and less control.

This is their position. And they have the power to implement it.

Now if we had great negotiators in charge, perhaps we could have played our limited hand better than we have.... But instead of great negotiators we have clowns like David Davis.

 

[r-u-s-x]

I'm glad you mention value for money, as that's one of my biggest gripes with the public provision of services.

I pay more than twice as much for the NHS per month than I do for private healthcare. So in order to provide value for money, the NHS needs to become significantly better whilst halving its costs. For people further up the tax chain than me, that's only going to be worse.

your private healthcare can only do that as they take the easy profitable stuff and leave the hard non profitable stuff to the NHS - surely you know this. If private were mandated to have to offer full service that NHS costs would shoot up or there would be a lot of things and people not covered and we as a democracy have decided this is not desirable.

Capitalism has winners and losers by definition, as a fair amount of the population will be losers we introduced the welfare state to address this imbalance. You mention a fair bit that democracy is important to you, the welfare state is the will of the people which we have to respect.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

No one is disputing that the EU is better off with us in it. What you repeatedly fail to understand are these very simple facts:

A) the EU is bigger than us and holds the majority of the cards.
B) their priority if we do leave, is to give us a worse deal then if we were to stay.

Now once you understand and accept A) and B).we can move on to C and D which is about the results of the negociations:

C) they will take the financial pain of us leaving on terms that hurt us both, for the political capital that having uk in economy in flames will bring them.

Or

D) they give us super soft Brexit - which means that nothing much changes except that we are slightly worse off have slightly less power and less control.

This is their position. And they have the power to implement it.

Now if we had great negotiators in charge, perhaps we could have played our limited hand better than we have.... But instead of great negotiators we have clowns like David Davis.

So the point that remainers think we havent a leg to stand on, but the EUs own response suggests otherwise is lost then? Predictable.

I do not fail to understand those points. The simple facts are

A) Yes its bigger. Yet we are a significant portion of that size when you look at the money. Landmass? Population? We are swamped. Finances? We swing big. Its naive to suggest otherwise.

B) Their priority, if we are to leave, will be their own survival first and foremost, before petty ideas of punishment. Which may well depend upon our continued trade and contribution. Which, if youre paying attention, means not everything is on their terms.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Stronger than remainers would have us believe. Its a simple sentence, it shouldnt take much explanation.

And yes, I did argue they wouldnt let us back in on the old terms. And I still think thats the case.
I did also think they wouldnt let us stay in on the old terms, I thought they would take it as a chance to finally have us fully integrate, but it appears not.
Which is why I suggest we might have a larger hand to play than remainers would like to think.

Its commonly understood that the EU would cancel article 50 which means we'd be back on previous terms. What the EU will not accept is the UK renegoting membership terms - that is off the table.

How you make the leap from the EU cancelling Article 50 to us having a stronger negotiating hand I don't understand.

 

[glasgowspur]

your private healthcare can only do that as they take the easy profitable stuff and leave the hard non profitable stuff to the NHS - surely you know this. If private were mandated to have to offer full service that NHS costs would shoot up or there would be a lot of things and people not covered and we as a democracy have decided this is not desirable.

Capitalism has winners and losers by definition, as a fair amount of the population will be losers we introduced the welfare state to address this imbalance. You mention a fair bit that democracy is important to you, the welfare state is the will of the people which we have to respect.

Some truth there, but maybe if the service had to be paid for people wouldn' abuse it (or their bodies) the way they do, thus saying money.

 

[r-u-s-x]

Some truth there, but maybe if the service had to be paid for people wouldn' abuse it (or their bodies) the way they do, thus saying money.

Maybe, I would think we are similar socially to the US and their poor are fatter than ours so using that as a guide it is probably unlikely.

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

Its commonly understood that the EU would cancel article 50 which means we'd be back on previous terms. What the EU will not accept is the UK renegoting membership terms - that is off the table.

How you make the leap from the EU cancelling Article 50 to us having a stronger negotiating hand I don't understand.

I dont really understand what is so difficult.

People say the EU will be laughing off into the sunset if we leave/stay/whatever. We are inconseqeuntial to them, and its only us that will suffer.

If that view is true, why would the EU let us revoke A50 and carry on as if nothing has happened?

We have caused an absolute brickstorm, and theyll just let it ride?

To revoke it we must be desperate, and they wont take that opportunity to strengthen the union?

And again - lets reiterate. Our hand is stronger than remainers would have us believe, that is not the same as saying its stronger than the EUs or anything like it. Thats a whole other conversation.

 

[r-u-s-x]

I dont really understand what is so difficult.

People say the EU will be laughing off into the sunset if we leave/stay/whatever. We are inconseqeuntial to them, and its only us that will suffer.

If that view is true, why would the EU let us revoke A50 and carry on as if nothing has happened?

We have caused an absolute brickstorm, and theyll just let it ride?

To revoke it we must be desperate, and they wont take that opportunity to strengthen the union?

And again - lets reiterate. Our hand is stronger than remainers would have us believe, that is not the same as saying its stronger than the EUs or anything like it. Thats a whole other conversation.

There is the legal argument there is one opinion that they have no option but to do this, this is disputed.

I think most (not all) are saying that the EU know that a hard Brexit will damage them but the EU believe that a soft Brexit where the UK get a better deal out then in would damage them more. There is no good outcome but there is a more desirable for the stability of the bloc.

 

[the dza]

your private healthcare can only do that as they take the easy profitable stuff and leave the hard non profitable stuff to the NHS - surely you know this. If private were mandated to have to offer full service that NHS costs would shoot up or there would be a lot of things and people not covered and we as a democracy have decided this is not desirable.

Capitalism has winners and losers by definition, as a fair amount of the population will be losers we introduced the welfare state to address this imbalance. You mention a fair bit that democracy is important to you, the welfare state is the will of the people which we have to respect.

I guess that is why the US spends more per capita on healthcare than any other nation yet tens of millions of their citizens have no proper healthcare coverage and terrible health outcomes. For universal healthcare coverage free at the point of use, the NHS is one of, if not the, best value healthcare systems in the world.

 

[StephenH]

For me all the ramainer vs leaver is imho all irrelevant.
It's about costs, Filthy Luke, the bottom line.....
Having nutters like Bojo making decisions or the Flemish version doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Edit ..... wanted say Show Me The Money!

 

[parklane1]

If you're unsure of the answer to either of those questions then you haven't been reading my posts for the last 6 months.

That is the problem for some posters, i have given up posting in here ( until this one) because all i hear is the moaning and wailing about " we are doomed" and they have been doing so for the last 12 months. They have been given answers by not only you but others as well they keep refusing to accept then, they have lost a vote and they will scream and scream.

As i say they will not listen and its pointless trying to get them too. imo

 

[StephenH]

That is the problem for some posters, i have given up posting in here ( until this one) because all i hear is the moaning and wailing about " we are doomed" and they have been doing so for the last 12 months. They have been given answers by not only you but others as well they keep refusing to accept then, they have lost a vote and they will scream and scream.

As i say they will not listen and its pointless trying to get them too. imo

Not just directed at your good self.

Wonder how many would except it if there was another vote!
When does leaving become too costly?
When would people say that's too costly?
Or do we leave no matter how much it would cost?

 

[nayimfromthehalfwayline]

There is the legal argument there is one opinion that they have no option but to do this, this is disputed.

I think most (not all) are saying that the EU know that a hard Brexit will damage them but the EU believe that a soft Brexit where the UK get a better deal out then in would damage them more. There is no good outcome but there is a more desirable for the stability of the bloc.

I dont buy it, it doesnt really make sense when you think about it. Same as the idea of punitive measures, it just doesnt really stack up.

 

[scaramanga]

your private healthcare can only do that as they take the easy profitable stuff and leave the hard non profitable stuff to the NHS - surely you know this. If private were mandated to have to offer full service that NHS costs would shoot up or there would be a lot of things and people not covered and we as a democracy have decided this is not desirable.

Capitalism has winners and losers by definition, as a fair amount of the population will be losers we introduced the welfare state to address this imbalance. You mention a fair bit that democracy is important to you, the welfare state is the will of the people which we have to respect.

I also regularly mention that people are idiots.