This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
 steeleye20  Croydon 18 Jun 17 7.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
So do you think the vote for leaving the EU by the public should be cancelled then? More votes were cast for leaving the EU than have ever been placed in any UK vote previously. Yes the government should act in the nations best interests and that means not accepting the voters advice to leave the EU.
|
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Jun 17 8.08pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Yes the government should act in the nations best interests and that means not accepting the voters advice to leave the EU. So you aren't a democrat then.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| davenotamonkey 18 Jun 17 9.35pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Actually I think steeleye's posts are rather good. Did you forget to log out, and back into another of your sockpuppet accounts? Or is there a reason you're discussing yourself with... yourself? Has Brexit all got a bit too much for you?
|
|
Attachment: | steeleye20 Croydon 18 Jun 17 9.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
So you aren't a democrat then. I am a democrat and vote in general elections but realise our system is not very good or particularly democratic. I am not in favour of referendums at all.
|
|
| davenotamonkey 18 Jun 17 9.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
i think you'll find there are a few people saying that, but i cant say ive seen that on here. You want us to work with you, tell us what your aims are and we'll pitch in. Balls in your court. No you* won't. We've already seen it, and continue to see it. You will fight, squeal and whine to derail it at any opportunity, because there is no parameter space in which we can work together. May laid out her strategy and road-map for leaving the EU back in January, at the Lancaster house speech: Her approach is eminently sensible: - Leave the single market, seek access to it. These were the substantive points from the referendum, enacted in strategy. I am totally uninterested in re-debating the referendum, and what it means to "Leave the EU". You may very well have your idea of what leaving means, but in my opinion, it is de-facto remaining. You won't get on board, you won't "pitch in". You don't agree with it. I suspect those in power would like you on board, to make a success of it. Rather that than seek failure at every opportunity, just for the "I told you so"; I hope for all our sakes that your self-fulfilling prophecies do not self-fulfill. Frankly, I'd rather not have your help if I were in Govt. I don't trust you, and I have little evidence to suggest I should start doing so. We'll hold onto that ball, thanks. Possession, 9/10ths and all that. *I refer to "you", in this post, as the collective embodiment of the now dwindling stock of remainiacs who have yet to take down the posters of Juncker, Verhofstadt and Van Rompuy from their bedroom walls.
|
|
| davenotamonkey 18 Jun 17 9.55pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
I am a democrat and vote in general elections but realise our system is not very good or particularly democratic. I am not in favour of referendums at all.
You are a democract, but you don't believe in the kratos of the demos, as expressed in it's purest form via "referendums" (sic). OK.
|
|
| Mapletree Croydon 18 Jun 17 10.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
You are a democract, but you don't believe in the kratos of the demos, as expressed in it's purest form via "referendums" (sic). OK. The concept of a referendum only works where the playing field is level. In this case people with little to lose voted in one direction and people with loads to lose the other. This was not a suitable issue for a referendum and I don't consider it a 'pure' aspect of democracy. In addition our version of democracy is intended to be representative democracy not direct democracy. The rationale for that is that it's very hard for the whole country to be properly briefed in an unbiased way when voting on crucial issues.
|
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 18 Jun 17 10.10pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
i think you'll find there are a few people saying that, but i cant say ive seen that on here. You want us to work with you, tell us what your aims are and we'll pitch in. Balls in your court. Nick, kermit, Steeleye, why do you think Attlee, Benn, Foot, Scargill and in reality, Corbyn, were/are so against being in the EU?
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
Kermit8  Hevon 18 Jun 17 10.19pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Nick, kermit, Steeleye, why do you think Attlee, Benn, Foot, Scargill and in reality, Corbyn, were/are so against being in the EU? Protectionism.
Big chest and massive boobs |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 18 Jun 17 10.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Nick, kermit, Steeleye, why do you think Attlee, Benn, Foot, Scargill and in reality, Corbyn, were/are so against being in the EU? You're not moving the subject forward. Leave won. Nearly a year ago. What's the plan?
|
|
 Hrolf The Ganger 18 Jun 17 10.33pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Did you forget to log out, and back into another of your sockpuppet accounts? Or is there a reason you're discussing yourself with... yourself? Has Brexit all got a bit too much for you? Knew it. Box of frogs anyone?
|
|
| davenotamonkey 18 Jun 17 10.43pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mapletree
The concept of a referendum only works where the playing field is level. In this case people with little to lose voted in one direction and people with loads to lose the other. This was not a suitable issue for a referendum and I don't consider it a 'pure' aspect of democracy. In addition our version of democracy is intended to be representative democracy not direct democracy. The rationale for that is that it's very hard for the whole country to be properly briefed in an unbiased way when voting on crucial issues. Why should there be a level playing field? The Swiss initiate a referendum by popular initiative. You are mired in the mindset of "winning and losing". It's really rather odd. We're just taking a different path. I speak to many of the less-frothy Europeans about this, and about Brexit, and they are surprised at the animus between the two Brexit sides. You're still pitching it as a battle, rather than simply a different path that has been democratically mandated we now follow. Going back to the Swiss, there are certainly limitations - so people cannot genuinely lose -- not social media lose: "oh my God, I've lost the right to 'love, live and learn' in Europe - oh noes!", but in terms of fundamental rights. As to your suggestion that voters are (essentially) too stupid to vote in referenda, due to the biased nature of information they receive... could you please explain how that is different to the information they receive voting in a General Election? If leaving the EU "isn't a suitable issue for a referendum", then how else is it decided? Do you not see GE as incredibly blunt tools? Am I allowed to say that 80%+ of the population are now Brexiteers, because they voted for parties in the GE committed to us leaving the EU? Why do we need a change of govt each and every time we need to decide on something of national importance? Isn't that chucking the baby out with the bathwater? I genuinely don't understand the resistance to direct democracy. MPs need to be executors of our kratos, not "acting according to either their interests of those of their lobbyists". The people are sovereign, and the government governs by consent of the people. You say our democracy is "intended to be representative" - ordained by who? Was there some unwritten rulebook somewhere? Why does it have to be that way? Why would it be so impossible to introduce a "referendum by popular initiative" on issues that "we, the people" deem important, but not parliament? Have you ever seen the online petitions ever receive anything more than a contemptuous waving of papers from the Green benches, when they reach the threshold? The only other avenue is lobbying your MP for a private members bill, which is similarly treated to a contemptuous waving of papers from the benches. To hell with that, frankly. I suggest you look at the type of initiatives the Swiss vote on. Some of them are mundane, some of them are very important. But the critical point is that their voice is undiluted by treacherous representatives who do not reflect their views. For the most part, it's not about "winners and losers" (I get it - politics here is now as entrenched as football in terms of loyalties, thus "winning" and "losing"
|
|
, it's about choosing the path for your country. I trust the electorate more than I do the career politicians who claim to represent us.... and if we screw up once in a while -- well, laws can be repealed, changed and amended. The Swiss don't seem to be falling apart because of it.
 Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 18 Jun 17 10.44pm |
|
|---|---|
|
F*cking classic.
|
|
| davenotamonkey 18 Jun 17 10.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
I hope that's not a Kermit reference...
|
|
| Mapletree Croydon 18 Jun 17 11.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by davenotamonkey
Why should there be a level playing field? The Swiss initiate a referendum by popular initiative. You are mired in the mindset of "winning and losing". It's really rather odd. We're just taking a different path. I speak to many of the less-frothy Europeans about this, and about Brexit, and they are surprised at the animus between the two Brexit sides. You're still pitching it as a battle, rather than simply a different path that has been democratically mandated we now follow. Going back to the Swiss, there are certainly limitations - so people cannot genuinely lose -- not social media lose: "oh my God, I've lost the right to 'love, live and learn' in Europe - oh noes!", but in terms of fundamental rights. As to your suggestion that voters are (essentially) too stupid to vote in referenda, due to the biased nature of information they receive... could you please explain how that is different to the information they receive voting in a General Election? If leaving the EU "isn't a suitable issue for a referendum", then how else is it decided? Do you not see GE as incredibly blunt tools? Am I allowed to say that 80%+ of the population are now Brexiteers, because they voted for parties in the GE committed to us leaving the EU? Why do we need a change of govt each and every time we need to decide on something of national importance? Isn't that chucking the baby out with the bathwater? I genuinely don't understand the resistance to direct democracy. MPs need to be executors of our kratos, not "acting according to either their interests of those of their lobbyists". The people are sovereign, and the government governs by consent of the people. You say our democracy is "intended to be representative" - ordained by who? Was there some unwritten rulebook somewhere? Why does it have to be that way? Why would it be so impossible to introduce a "referendum by popular initiative" on issues that "we, the people" deem important, but not parliament? Have you ever seen the online petitions ever receive anything more than a contemptuous waving of papers from the Green benches, when they reach the threshold? The only other avenue is lobbying your MP for a private members bill, which is similarly treated to a contemptuous waving of papers from the benches. To hell with that, frankly. I suggest you look at the type of initiatives the Swiss vote on. Some of them are mundane, some of them are very important. But the critical point is that their voice is undiluted by treacherous representatives who do not reflect their views. For the most part, it's not about "winners and losers" (I get it - politics here is now as entrenched as football in terms of loyalties, thus "winning" and "losing" The vote was binary. It was not subject to nuance. We are leaving the EU and many people, like I have already, will lose their jobs. But many people will feel they have greater control. You have not responded to the point that the effects are unbalanced and so one vote per person does not reflect the consequences of the decision.
|
|
Nevada Eagle  Carson City, Nevada 19 Jun 17 5.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
Pretty simple. Get out.
Sing up ya bums |
|
europalace  Europe 19 Jun 17 5.40am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Nevada Eagle
Pretty simple. Get out. er, no, it's not as simple as that. If you're from the US then you might view it as simple because you're not part of the EU. The British will only start to understand the impact of leaving starting this week and fully unfolding over the next 22 months as negotiations start and proceed over that period of time. At the end of that period, the actual deal on the plate that was voted for will be known, not any sooner than that.
|
|
| europalace Europe 19 Jun 17 7.08am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by .TUX.
The EU is a busted flush. The reason the ECB is using QE is to keep the Euro from appreciating even more as that would hurt exports from the Eurozone. The reason the Euro has remained strong is because of huge inward investment by external business. This is the exact opposite to what has happened in the UK since last year where inward investment has virtually dried up on a relative scale. That's why GBP has plummeted - no one wants to invest in an economy that is unsure of where it's going since voting to leave the EU. So, with regards to the EU being a busted flush, that's only what people like yourself actually wish. In reality looking at economies and currencies the reality is that the UK is currently on that road to being a 'busted flush' as you put it. Regarding the UK being 'better out than in', how can you come to that conclusion when negotiations with the EU haven't even started yet? You will only be able to judge the impact of leaving when those negotiations have concluded, not anytime before that. Edited by europalace (19 Jun 2017 7.11am)
|
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 19 Jun 17 8.19am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by nickgusset
You're not moving the subject forward. Leave won. Nearly a year ago. What's the plan? Leave as quickly as possible, any deals should not involve free movement of people, parliamentary sovereignty must be assured as should British courts' jurisdiction.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.