Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum.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

Page 59 of 1552 < 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 >

Rudi Hedman Caterham 27 May 16 10.43am
Originally posted by JohnyBoy The 'governments guesswork' i have used is based on independent forecasts from the IMF, OECD, the treasury, IFS, the world bank and over 90% of economists who currently predict that the economy would be hit by between 1.5% - 9.5%. My own judgement would be somewhere in the middle, so like everyone else (atleast with any credibility) i would say that i dont know exactly by how much we would be worse off but almosy certainly still worse off. You may prefer to use your own economic models, that is your right, but to dismiss all of the forecasts we have been given is perhaps naive. Isolationism would imply that trading tariffs (exact % TBD) would be introduced and it is likely from many studies on trade tarrifs and protectionism that we would not get as good a deal as could be negotiated by the eu, as they would insert MFN (most favoured nation) clauses into their agreements which means that if say the US did a trade deal on bananas or whatever with the eu, they would be prevented to do a better deal with another trading block or country. The tariffs we would incur would need to be reciprocated to defend our domestic market but the sum of the parts suggest both parties would be worse off. The other guesswork you've used is from closed meetings where the result comes before the calculation has been done. If you saw Paul Hilton on QT last night or on tv before you'll know that these £4,300 numbers and such like are fabricated g&sh. He was strategy director for David Cameron. He now isn't and is coming clean on how false all the sh1t that the Euro-sceptic and pro-exit if no real reform is agreed Cameron & Osborne are being. And the high % fall in GDP is no doubt calculated without expansion in other markets. What's our export level outside the EU? 55%. How much of our ecnomy is SME's? Is it 80%. There will no doubt be a difficult period but it'll be worth it. Life lasts longer than 2,5 years or 1 economic cycle and it's not just for now or your next house move. This is an opportunity to break free, determine our own future and plan our own domestic policies. COYP

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 27 May 16 10.43am

Originally posted by JohnyBoy

The 'governments guesswork' i have used is based on independent forecasts from the IMF, OECD, the treasury, IFS, the world bank and over 90% of economists who currently predict that the economy would be hit by between 1.5% - 9.5%. My own judgement would be somewhere in the middle, so like everyone else (atleast with any credibility) i would say that i dont know exactly by how much we would be worse off but almosy certainly still worse off.
You may prefer to use your own economic models, that is your right, but to dismiss all of the forecasts we have been given is perhaps naive.
Isolationism would imply that trading tariffs (exact % TBD) would be introduced and it is likely from many studies on trade tarrifs and protectionism that we would not get as good a deal as could be negotiated by the eu, as they would insert MFN (most favoured nation) clauses into their agreements which means that if say the US did a trade deal on bananas or whatever with the eu, they would be prevented to do a better deal with another trading block or country. The tariffs we would incur would need to be reciprocated to defend our domestic market but the sum of the parts suggest both parties would be worse off.

The other guesswork you've used is from closed meetings where the result comes before the calculation has been done. If you saw Paul Hilton on QT last night or on tv before you'll know that these £4,300 numbers and such like are fabricated g&sh. He was strategy director for David Cameron. He now isn't and is coming clean on how false all the sh1t that the Euro-sceptic and pro-exit if no real reform is agreed Cameron & Osborne are being.

And the high % fall in GDP is no doubt calculated without expansion in other markets. What's our export level outside the EU? 55%. How much of our ecnomy is SME's? Is it 80%. There will no doubt be a difficult period but it'll be worth it. Life lasts longer than 2,5 years or 1 economic cycle and it's not just for now or your next house move. This is an opportunity to break free, determine our own future and plan our own domestic policies.

COYP

JohnyBoy 27 May 16 2.13pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman Either you're George Osborne's think tank or echo. A lot of what you've posted has been shown to be fantasy, calculations made on worst case scenarios with absolutely no positives whatsoever included or come from the cosy establishment that have vested interests and allies within their protected web of expertise. Where were they before 2008 and other obviously awful economic recessions? Even a leftie who you respect has said he wants out, yet on here that wasn't posted. Yes, the mature Paul Mason who said he wanted out but had a problem voting out because those nasty tories, BJ and MG, would be leading Britain. How mature. Consider voting in because he doesn't like them? Why not vote out and in the next General Election and try and elect a centre left party which is what a few pro-immigration but anti-EU lefties I've heard say. That's democracy. Martin Lewis had it right. If you can embrace risk and see a bright future then it can sway you to vote out. If you cannot take risk then vote in. You'll probably have a little less money for a while and there may be economic shocks on the way, but the upside could be worth it. 'The Agenda' programme has been removed from the ITV website. All other episodes in the series have been left there to view. Funny that. I'm tired of this country pandering to the EU and big business, which is what this Union is all for. SME's are where the future can be for this country and a fairer distribution of wealth with less fat cats and less emphasis on short-term goals for end of year only and focus on share prices. Just look at the German economy for proof. Edited by Rudi Hedman (27 May 2016 11.17am) Rudi: wrt Paul Mason, i think it was fairly clear by my example that whilst i think he is worth listening to I would never subscribe to his far left economic policies. Similarly with Patrick Minford or monterism/Thatcherism far right economic policies i would never vote or advocate such policies...infact i often wonder what was worse. But i really dont think it wise to be so dismissive of IMF, OECD, BofE etc....and using words like guesswork or fantasy. I worked as an economist/fund manager for 20 years and worked on or had oversight responsibility for some complex economic models...but i assure you NO ONE has the sophisticated models that the treasury or BofE have at there disposal. They have access to the most data inputs, historical analysis and forecasting tools you can possibly imagine....and the financial markets stop to hear the outcome of there anslysis (hanging on every word) because thats what policy is based on. If i had told the teams i worked with that they were just fantasy or guesses (hey lets use our own!) they would have thought i had become frankly delusional. Data is data and we can interpret them differently but i find it very very hard to believe that the economists at the IMF or OECD would have somehow massaged the figures because of some grand conspiracy by George Osborne who decided to call in a favour and ask them to distort the outcome...surely this is absurd. The 330,000 immigration figures were similarly disputed by UKIP who just seem to be trying to discredit any figures because they might not serve sufficiently their referendum objectives i.e. they have a vested political interest. I have agreed that we need to work on the eu from within, not to say i agree with having 'elected' representatives to oversee the shape of bananas or the quality of tobacco. TBH i find it almost ridiculous to even hear it being suggested that we would hold elections for such posts but it gives UKIP the chance to accuse the trade bodies and regulators of being unelected and therefore undemocratic....and unless those allotments in Norwood have suddenly developed a tropical climate when was the last time you saw a banana grove or tobacco plantation in the uk? The reality is that we have eu elections that apparently has had 73 laws imposed on the uk over the last 10 years or so (source: page 81 of this thread) that we voted against....although when i asked, nobody on here was able to tell me what 1 of these were (without googling)..paternity leave or workers rights maybe?.... We should remember that our own house of lords (also unelected) rejected 60 laws from the house of commons just in the last sitting, but what the conspiracy theorists should be asking is why UKIP (which hold 1/3rd) of the UK's seats in Brussels has the worst (out of more than 700 parties) attendance record and voted against (in an aye or nay vote) the UK getting the rebate (worth approx £7-8 billion)....surely they were only thinking of their political vested interests again and not of the UK economy? Bet you didnt see that emblazoned on boris' blunderbus!! Lastly Rudi...you may have a maverick attitude towards betting and risk and say it will be worth us going through 2.5 years of smaller growth for the longer term gain. I say that this gamble is simply not worth taking and will cause considerable damage to our NHS (affecting the quality of life of millions), pensions (old people), schools (kids) and welfare (the poor and disabled)....not to mention £4,300 for every household,....these may be taken for granted by some but are simply not things to be gambled with IMO.

JohnyBoy

27 May 16 2.13pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Either you're George Osborne's think tank or echo.

A lot of what you've posted has been shown to be fantasy, calculations made on worst case scenarios with absolutely no positives whatsoever included or come from the cosy establishment that have vested interests and allies within their protected web of expertise. Where were they before 2008 and other obviously awful economic recessions?

Even a leftie who you respect has said he wants out, yet on here that wasn't posted. Yes, the mature Paul Mason who said he wanted out but had a problem voting out because those nasty tories, BJ and MG, would be leading Britain. How mature. Consider voting in because he doesn't like them? Why not vote out and in the next General Election and try and elect a centre left party which is what a few pro-immigration but anti-EU lefties I've heard say. That's democracy.

Martin Lewis had it right. If you can embrace risk and see a bright future then it can sway you to vote out. If you cannot take risk then vote in. You'll probably have a little less money for a while and there may be economic shocks on the way, but the upside could be worth it. 'The Agenda' programme has been removed from the ITV website. All other episodes in the series have been left there to view. Funny that.

I'm tired of this country pandering to the EU and big business, which is what this Union is all for. SME's are where the future can be for this country and a fairer distribution of wealth with less fat cats and less emphasis on short-term goals for end of year only and focus on share prices. Just look at the German economy for proof.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (27 May 2016 11.17am)

Rudi: wrt Paul Mason, i think it was fairly clear by my example that whilst i think he is worth listening to I would never subscribe to his far left economic policies. Similarly with Patrick Minford or monterism/Thatcherism far right economic policies i would never vote or advocate such policies...infact i often wonder what was worse.
But i really dont think it wise to be so dismissive of IMF, OECD, BofE etc....and using words like guesswork or fantasy. I worked as an economist/fund manager for 20 years and worked on or had oversight responsibility for some complex economic models...but i assure you NO ONE has the sophisticated models that the treasury or BofE have at there disposal. They have access to the most data inputs, historical analysis and forecasting tools you can possibly imagine....and the financial markets stop to hear the outcome of there anslysis (hanging on every word) because thats what policy is based on. If i had told the teams i worked with that they were just fantasy or guesses (hey lets use our own!) they would have thought i had become frankly delusional.
Data is data and we can interpret them differently but i find it very very hard to believe that the economists at the IMF or OECD would have somehow massaged the figures because of some grand conspiracy by George Osborne who decided to call in a favour and ask them to distort the outcome...surely this is absurd.
The 330,000 immigration figures were similarly disputed by UKIP who just seem to be trying to discredit any figures because they might not serve sufficiently their referendum objectives i.e. they have a vested political interest.
I have agreed that we need to work on the eu from within, not to say i agree with having 'elected' representatives to oversee the shape of bananas or the quality of tobacco. TBH i find it almost ridiculous to even hear it being suggested that we would hold elections for such posts but it gives UKIP the chance to accuse the trade bodies and regulators of being unelected and therefore undemocratic....and unless those allotments in Norwood have suddenly developed a tropical climate when was the last time you saw a banana grove or tobacco plantation in the uk?
The reality is that we have eu elections that apparently has had 73 laws imposed on the uk over the last 10 years or so (source: page 81 of this thread) that we voted against....although when i asked, nobody on here was able to tell me what 1 of these were (without googling)..paternity leave or workers rights maybe?.... We should remember that our own house of lords (also unelected) rejected 60 laws from the house of commons just in the last sitting, but what the conspiracy theorists should be asking is why UKIP (which hold 1/3rd) of the UK's seats in Brussels has the worst (out of more than 700 parties) attendance record and voted against (in an aye or nay vote) the UK getting the rebate (worth approx £7-8 billion)....surely they were only thinking of their political vested interests again and not of the UK economy? Bet you didnt see that emblazoned on boris' blunderbus!!
Lastly Rudi...you may have a maverick attitude towards betting and risk and say it will be worth us going through 2.5 years of smaller growth for the longer term gain. I say that this gamble is simply not worth taking and will cause considerable damage to our NHS (affecting the quality of life of millions), pensions (old people), schools (kids) and welfare (the poor and disabled)....not to mention £4,300 for every household,....these may be taken for granted by some but are simply not things to be gambled with IMO.

silvertop Portishead 27 May 16 2.34pm
Originally posted by slubglurge No one has to convince me; its out all the way. 10 years ago my wifes company offered all the staff a redundacy payment to leave. My wife and two friends stayed, they then refilled the posts with Lithuanians who had just joined the EU. They haven't had a payrise since What makes you think it will be any different after an out vote? Initially, you will be delighted as we lift the drawbridge and issue in a period of wage led inflation coupled with economic decline and political instability. Still, there will be no greasy foreigners cluttering up our doctor's surgeries or taking our women and jobs etc. I also think it hilarious that people think: UK big economy = strong bargaining power to renegotiate trade deals. Actually it is one isolated medium weight country v massive trading block. Trust me, they will dictate every term. On this, when we finally manage to secure a deal [and we will not survive without one], the EU will have dictated at least one caveat on which they show no sign of budging: free movement to EU citizens. You only have to look at Switzerland, one of those countries who outers cite as how it can be done. In fact, they spent years negotiating deals with the EU. They had to. And one of the conditions imposed on them was free movement. What makes you think it will be any different for us? So, the Swiss had a referendum and elected to limit EU citizen entry. Cue stringent retaliation from the EU which has only just started to punish little Switzerland. No, after our happy honeymoon of xenophobia, the EU will impose tough conditions on any trade deal which will likely involve us having to pay significant sums to the EU [perhaps more than we do now?]; obey many EU directives [like those other heroes of independence Norway have to]; and accept free movement [like Switzerland]. And this will all be offered and accepted by little England on a take it or leave it basis. So, by all means, vote for international isolation and ultimate humiliation. However, remember - those pesky Latvians et al may be cleared out of your wife's work for now; but they will be back, assuming of course that her employers do not go bust in the interim period.

silvertop

Portishead 27 May 16 2.34pm

Originally posted by slubglurge

No one has to convince me; its out all the way. 10 years ago my wifes company offered all the staff a redundacy payment to leave. My wife and two friends stayed, they then refilled the posts with Lithuanians who had just joined the EU. They haven't had a payrise since

What makes you think it will be any different after an out vote? Initially, you will be delighted as we lift the drawbridge and issue in a period of wage led inflation coupled with economic decline and political instability. Still, there will be no greasy foreigners cluttering up our doctor's surgeries or taking our women and jobs etc.

I also think it hilarious that people think: UK big economy = strong bargaining power to renegotiate trade deals. Actually it is one isolated medium weight country v massive trading block. Trust me, they will dictate every term.

On this, when we finally manage to secure a deal [and we will not survive without one], the EU will have dictated at least one caveat on which they show no sign of budging: free movement to EU citizens. You only have to look at Switzerland, one of those countries who outers cite as how it can be done. In fact, they spent years negotiating deals with the EU. They had to. And one of the conditions imposed on them was free movement. What makes you think it will be any different for us?

So, the Swiss had a referendum and elected to limit EU citizen entry. Cue stringent retaliation from the EU which has only just started to punish little Switzerland.

No, after our happy honeymoon of xenophobia, the EU will impose tough conditions on any trade deal which will likely involve us having to pay significant sums to the EU [perhaps more than we do now?]; obey many EU directives [like those other heroes of independence Norway have to]; and accept free movement [like Switzerland]. And this will all be offered and accepted by little England on a take it or leave it basis.

So, by all means, vote for international isolation and ultimate humiliation. However, remember - those pesky Latvians et al may be cleared out of your wife's work for now; but they will be back, assuming of course that her employers do not go bust in the interim period.

silvertop Portishead 27 May 16 2.42pm
Originally posted by Sportyteacher Originally posted by Kermit8 Latest Mori poll: 1,000 randomly asked Remain a member of the European Union: 48% Leave the European Union: 35% Undecided: 14% Would not vote:3% I make that 65% idiots/potential idiots according to monkeychops and 35% the enlightened, sensible brave new world few also according to monkeychops. [Link] Edited by Kermit8 (18 May 2016 10.05pm)[/quote I, for one, can't wait for this EU referendum to get out of the way. Despite the importance and ramifications of the vote, this is ONE subject for debate that has clearly limited Government resources from getting on with its main day-to-day work, and with a LONG summer recess just around the corner. No wonder very little gets achieved within this country e.g. maintenance /modernisation of infrastructure. Kermit: fear not. Your lot may have only 35% of the vote but a considerably higher % of those who will actually put a cross down. Sadly, it is much more even. Sporty, don't fret on that. While politicians run around waving their little willies about, the juggernaut that is the civil service continues to run the country; and industry continues to knock out goods and services. However, that is not to diminish politicians. If the no vote wins, it will just mean that the civil service [and judicial system] will have to undergo a huge wasteful overhaul; and industry will be producing significantly less than it is now; until, of course, we are humiliatingly forced to go begging to the EU when all those massive adjustments will need to be set back to where they are now.

silvertop

Portishead 27 May 16 2.42pm

Originally posted by Sportyteacher

Originally posted by Kermit8

Latest Mori poll: 1,000 randomly asked

Remain a member of the European Union: 48%

Leave the European Union: 35%

Undecided: 14%

Would not vote:3%

I make that 65% idiots/potential idiots according to monkeychops and 35% the enlightened, sensible brave new world few also according to monkeychops.

[Link]

Edited by Kermit8 (18 May 2016 10.05pm)[/quote

I, for one, can't wait for this EU referendum to get out of the way. Despite the importance and ramifications of the vote, this is ONE subject for debate that has clearly limited Government resources from getting on with its main day-to-day work, and with a LONG summer recess just around the corner.

No wonder very little gets achieved within this country e.g. maintenance /modernisation of infrastructure.

Kermit: fear not. Your lot may have only 35% of the vote but a considerably higher % of those who will actually put a cross down. Sadly, it is much more even.

Sporty, don't fret on that. While politicians run around waving their little willies about, the juggernaut that is the civil service continues to run the country; and industry continues to knock out goods and services.

However, that is not to diminish politicians. If the no vote wins, it will just mean that the civil service [and judicial system] will have to undergo a huge wasteful overhaul; and industry will be producing significantly less than it is now; until, of course, we are humiliatingly forced to go begging to the EU when all those massive adjustments will need to be set back to where they are now.

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 27 May 16 3.56pm
Originally posted by silvertop What makes you think it will be any different after an out vote? Initially, you will be delighted as we lift the drawbridge and issue in a period of wage led inflation coupled with economic decline and political instability. Still, there will be no greasy foreigners cluttering up our doctor's surgeries or taking our women and jobs etc. I also think it hilarious that people think: UK big economy = strong bargaining power to renegotiate trade deals. Actually it is one isolated medium weight country v massive trading block. Trust me, they will dictate every term. On this, when we finally manage to secure a deal [and we will not survive without one], the EU will have dictated at least one caveat on which they show no sign of budging: free movement to EU citizens. You only have to look at Switzerland, one of those countries who outers cite as how it can be done. In fact, they spent years negotiating deals with the EU. They had to. And one of the conditions imposed on them was free movement. What makes you think it will be any different for us? So, the Swiss had a referendum and elected to limit EU citizen entry. Cue stringent retaliation from the EU which has only just started to punish little Switzerland. No, after our happy honeymoon of xenophobia, the EU will impose tough conditions on any trade deal which will likely involve us having to pay significant sums to the EU [perhaps more than we do now?]; obey many EU directives [like those other heroes of independence Norway have to]; and accept free movement [like Switzerland]. And this will all be offered and accepted by little England on a take it or leave it basis. So, by all means, vote for international isolation and ultimate humiliation. However, remember - those pesky Latvians et al may be cleared out of your wife's work for now; but they will be back, assuming of course that her employers do not go bust in the interim period. In other words, give in to bullying. Good job we didn't in 1939, eh? Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 27 May 16 3.56pm

Originally posted by silvertop

So, the Swiss had a referendum and elected to limit EU citizen entry. Cue stringent retaliation from the EU which has only just started to punish little Switzerland.

In other words, give in to bullying. Good job we didn't in 1939, eh?

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

DivingIsNotGood se25 27 May 16 4.49pm
Question, it's mainly older and middle aged folk that want OUT with the younger generation likely to vote IN. How is it then that the vote IN scaremonger tactics is to say if we leave house prices are likely to drop dramatically. Surely this would attract younger voters to vote OUT as they are desperate for house prices to drop. Is Cameron shooting himself in the foot with this house price crash scare tactic? VOTING OUT - Brexit will allow Britain to embrace the Commonwealth and be GREAT again

DivingIsNotGood

se25 27 May 16 4.49pm

Question, it's mainly older and middle aged folk that want OUT with the younger generation likely to vote IN.

How is it then that the vote IN scaremonger tactics is to say if we leave house prices are likely to drop dramatically.

Surely this would attract younger voters to vote OUT as they are desperate for house prices to drop. Is Cameron shooting himself in the foot with this house price crash scare tactic?

VOTING OUT - Brexit will allow Britain to embrace the Commonwealth and be GREAT again

JL85 London,SE9 27 May 16 4.52pm
Originally posted by DivingIsNotGood Question, it's mainly older and middle aged folk that want OUT with the younger generation likely to vote IN. How is it then that the vote IN scaremonger tactics is to say if we leave house prices are likely to drop dramatically. Surely this would attract younger voters to vote OUT as they are desperate for house prices to drop. Is Cameron shooting himself in the foot with this house price crash scare tactic? Based on what?

JL85

London,SE9 27 May 16 4.52pm

Originally posted by DivingIsNotGood

Question, it's mainly older and middle aged folk that want OUT with the younger generation likely to vote IN.

How is it then that the vote IN scaremonger tactics is to say if we leave house prices are likely to drop dramatically.

Surely this would attract younger voters to vote OUT as they are desperate for house prices to drop. Is Cameron shooting himself in the foot with this house price crash scare tactic?

Based on what?

DivingIsNotGood se25 27 May 16 4.59pm
Originally posted by JL85 Based on what? Polls [Link] and IMF warnings [Link] u30's housing struggles [Link] Edited by DivingIsNotGood (27 May 2016 5.00pm) VOTING OUT - Brexit will allow Britain to embrace the Commonwealth and be GREAT again

DivingIsNotGood

se25 27 May 16 4.59pm

Originally posted by JL85

Based on what?

Polls [Link]

and IMF warnings [Link]

u30's housing struggles [Link]

Edited by DivingIsNotGood (27 May 2016 5.00pm)

VOTING OUT - Brexit will allow Britain to embrace the Commonwealth and be GREAT again

Rudi Hedman Caterham 27 May 16 5.40pm
Originally posted by DivingIsNotGood Question, it's mainly older and middle aged folk that want OUT with the younger generation likely to vote IN. How is it then that the vote IN scaremonger tactics is to say if we leave house prices are likely to drop dramatically. Surely this would attract younger voters to vote OUT as they are desperate for house prices to drop. Is Cameron shooting himself in the foot with this house price crash scare tactic? I get the feeling when the tv reporters ask young 'inners', they have dreams of living abroad but many never will. They just like the idea they can. A few years down the line they'll be complainers but never following through their intentions like so many. They never actually interview any youngsters that want out, unless they get onto QT. There was a young leftie last night who intends to vote out but hopes Labour get in to open the borders for unlimited immigration. That's his prerogative but I doubt most youngsters want in. There'll be plenty who agree with parents or who work in trades where they know immigration has driven down wages. Voter turn out will be a big factor. Write off lots of students. They won't be registered at home and won't travel or pay huge fairs to go back to uni towns to vote. COYP

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 27 May 16 5.40pm

Originally posted by DivingIsNotGood

Question, it's mainly older and middle aged folk that want OUT with the younger generation likely to vote IN.

How is it then that the vote IN scaremonger tactics is to say if we leave house prices are likely to drop dramatically.

Surely this would attract younger voters to vote OUT as they are desperate for house prices to drop. Is Cameron shooting himself in the foot with this house price crash scare tactic?

I get the feeling when the tv reporters ask young 'inners', they have dreams of living abroad but many never will. They just like the idea they can. A few years down the line they'll be complainers but never following through their intentions like so many.

They never actually interview any youngsters that want out, unless they get onto QT. There was a young leftie last night who intends to vote out but hopes Labour get in to open the borders for unlimited immigration. That's his prerogative but I doubt most youngsters want in. There'll be plenty who agree with parents or who work in trades where they know immigration has driven down wages.

Voter turn out will be a big factor. Write off lots of students. They won't be registered at home and won't travel or pay huge fairs to go back to uni towns to vote.

COYP

Rudi Hedman Caterham 27 May 16 6.17pm
Originally posted by JohnyBoy Lastly Rudi...you may have a maverick attitude towards betting and risk and say it will be worth us going through 2.5 years of smaller growth for the longer term gain. I say that this gamble is simply not worth taking and will cause considerable damage to our NHS (affecting the quality of life of millions), pensions (old people), schools (kids) and welfare (the poor and disabled)....not to mention £4,300 for every household,....these may be taken for granted by some but are simply not things to be gambled with IMO. That's the spirit. Stifle entrepreneurial enterprises and high employment SME's for bigger business and the share holder model. Again, that £4,300 figure is pulled out of the air. Paul Hilton who was Cameron's strategy director has said that these figures are plucked out of the air like fluff floating past your nose. And sure I respect all the major financial bodies and institutions with their data. They're always bang on the money with every downturn and recession and never revise their analysis sending indices or bond markets moving in vertical lines within seconds during a UK BofE Governor or President of ECB conference, which is what you refer to with 'hanging on every word.' So, they're allowed to change their forecast or view from month to month and see a bond market move a point because it's their licence, yet somehow they've got the UK's future bang on for years to come whereas previously there's been no warning of recessions and plenty of u-turns of analysis and commentary. Analysis is no doubt a headache but it's easier to give your opinion than act on it, and change your opinion come to that. And we in the out camp are aware it's not going to be pretty but are in this for the long-haul. And if you look at some of the claims. They start with 'could', might', 'will', depending on how confident or doubtful they are. IMO they are concerned for their own immediate careers because the upside will come after their time. Edited by Rudi Hedman (27 May 2016 6.21pm) COYP

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 27 May 16 6.17pm

Originally posted by JohnyBoy

Lastly Rudi...you may have a maverick attitude towards betting and risk and say it will be worth us going through 2.5 years of smaller growth for the longer term gain. I say that this gamble is simply not worth taking and will cause considerable damage to our NHS (affecting the quality of life of millions), pensions (old people), schools (kids) and welfare (the poor and disabled)....not to mention £4,300 for every household,....these may be taken for granted by some but are simply not things to be gambled with IMO.

That's the spirit. Stifle entrepreneurial enterprises and high employment SME's for bigger business and the share holder model.

Again, that £4,300 figure is pulled out of the air. Paul Hilton who was Cameron's strategy director has said that these figures are plucked out of the air like fluff floating past your nose.

And sure I respect all the major financial bodies and institutions with their data. They're always bang on the money with every downturn and recession and never revise their analysis sending indices or bond markets moving in vertical lines within seconds during a UK BofE Governor or President of ECB conference, which is what you refer to with 'hanging on every word.'

So, they're allowed to change their forecast or view from month to month and see a bond market move a point because it's their licence, yet somehow they've got the UK's future bang on for years to come whereas previously there's been no warning of recessions and plenty of u-turns of analysis and commentary. Analysis is no doubt a headache but it's easier to give your opinion than act on it, and change your opinion come to that. And we in the out camp are aware it's not going to be pretty but are in this for the long-haul.

And if you look at some of the claims. They start with 'could', might', 'will', depending on how confident or doubtful they are. IMO they are concerned for their own immediate careers because the upside will come after their time.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (27 May 2016 6.21pm)

COYP

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 27 May 16 7.24pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman That's the spirit. Stifle entrepreneurial enterprises and high employment SME's for bigger business and the share holder model. Again, that £4,300 figure is pulled out of the air. Paul Hilton who was Cameron's strategy director has said that these figures are plucked out of the air like fluff floating past your nose. And sure I respect all the major financial bodies and institutions with their data. They're always bang on the money with every downturn and recession and never revise their analysis sending indices or bond markets moving in vertical lines within seconds during a UK BofE Governor or President of ECB conference, which is what you refer to with 'hanging on every word.' So, they're allowed to change their forecast or view from month to month and see a bond market move a point because it's their licence, yet somehow they've got the UK's future bang on for years to come whereas previously there's been no warning of recessions and plenty of u-turns of analysis and commentary. Analysis is no doubt a headache but it's easier to give your opinion than act on it, and change your opinion come to that. And we in the out camp are aware it's not going to be pretty but are in this for the long-haul. And if you look at some of the claims. They start with 'could', might', 'will', depending on how confident or doubtful they are. IMO they are concerned for their own immediate careers because the upside will come after their time. Edited by Rudi Hedman (27 May 2016 6.21pm) Economists are over rated. I bet nearly all of these experts didn't see the crash coming, why do we still trust them. That said, I'm still undecided on which way to vote.

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 27 May 16 7.24pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

That's the spirit. Stifle entrepreneurial enterprises and high employment SME's for bigger business and the share holder model.

Again, that £4,300 figure is pulled out of the air. Paul Hilton who was Cameron's strategy director has said that these figures are plucked out of the air like fluff floating past your nose.

Edited by Rudi Hedman (27 May 2016 6.21pm)

Economists are over rated. I bet nearly all of these experts didn't see the crash coming, why do we still trust them.

That said, I'm still undecided on which way to vote.

silvertop Portishead 27 May 16 7.35pm
Originally posted by Cucking Funt In other words, give in to bullying. Good job we didn't in 1939, eh? Hardly comparable; side steps the points made; and for giving in to bullying, I could counter with another trite platitude: if you can't beat em join em. Only we are already joined.

silvertop

Portishead 27 May 16 7.35pm

Originally posted by Cucking Funt

In other words, give in to bullying. Good job we didn't in 1939, eh?

Hardly comparable; side steps the points made; and for giving in to bullying, I could counter with another trite platitude: if you can't beat em join em. Only we are already joined.

truleigh 27 May 16 8.09pm
Oh I hope that little gnome of a coward Cameron watched Warcraft ... and choked on it and his popcorns, and the day he leaves office (The Office, pun intended) will be a party. Kind people have a wonderful dream. Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 8.10pm) Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 8.10pm) I, your glass, Will modestly discover to yourself That of yourself which yet you know not of.

truleigh

27 May 16 8.09pm

Oh I hope that little gnome of a coward Cameron watched Warcraft ... and choked on it and his popcorns, and the day he leaves office (The Office, pun intended) will be a party. Kind people have a wonderful dream.

Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 8.10pm)

I, your glass,
Will modestly discover to yourself
That of yourself which yet you know not of.

Kermit8 Hevon 27 May 16 8.31pm
When all has been said and done not one of the 'Outs' on here or otherwise has convinced sufficiently that we will be better off economically away from the EU and that the peace in Western and central Europe that has evolved over the last 70 years will definitely not be compromised for the next 70 should the EU break up with not a little help from ourselves in June. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]

Kermit8

Hevon 27 May 16 8.31pm

When all has been said and done not one of the 'Outs' on here or otherwise has convinced sufficiently that we will be better off economically away from the EU and that the peace in Western and central Europe that has evolved over the last 70 years will definitely not be compromised for the next 70 should the EU break up with not a little help from ourselves in June.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

truleigh 27 May 16 8.54pm
At least we will have a new Wembley match ... like Six vs. Three. I recommend the remaining of Beatles playing Hello, Goodbye at this match and a few Turkish and Russian players on the Team Of The Future vs. Ego Countries leaving like UK, Denmark, Netherlands (finally living up to their name NETHER). Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 8.55pm) Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 9.01pm) I, your glass, Will modestly discover to yourself That of yourself which yet you know not of.

truleigh

27 May 16 8.54pm

At least we will have a new Wembley match ... like Six vs. Three.

I recommend the remaining of Beatles playing Hello, Goodbye at this match and a few Turkish and Russian players on the Team Of The Future vs. Ego Countries leaving like UK, Denmark, Netherlands (finally living up to their name NETHER).

Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 8.55pm)

Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 9.01pm)

I, your glass,
Will modestly discover to yourself
That of yourself which yet you know not of.

JohnyBoy 27 May 16 9.05pm
Originally posted by truleigh At least we will have a new Wembley match ... like Six vs. Three. I recommend the remaining of Beatles playing Hello, Goodbye at this match and a few Turkish and Russian players on the Team Of The Future vs. Ego Countries leaving like UK, Denmark, Netherlands (finally living up to their name NETHER). Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 8.55pm) Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 9.01pm) That made me laugh...good man

JohnyBoy

27 May 16 9.05pm

Originally posted by truleigh

At least we will have a new Wembley match ... like Six vs. Three.

Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 8.55pm)

Edited by truleigh (27 May 2016 9.01pm)

That made me laugh...good man

Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 28 May 16 11.10am
Originally posted by silvertop Hardly comparable; side steps the points made; and for giving in to bullying, I could counter with another trite platitude: if you can't beat em join em. Only we are already joined. A hegemonous Europe dominated by Germany and you say it's hardly comparable? The aims are the same; only the weapons have changed. The consequences of Brexit, as described by you, are bullying by any definition you care to use. These are no 'trite platitudes', old chap. The long term objective is a European superstate with Britain surrendering more and more of its sovereignly as that aim is assiduously pursued. A vote for Brexit is a vote to expose the whole corrupt, unaccountable, ramshackle, artificial nature of the organisation for what it is. "We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down". Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Cucking Funt

Clapham on the Back 28 May 16 11.10am

Originally posted by silvertop

Hardly comparable; side steps the points made; and for giving in to bullying, I could counter with another trite platitude: if you can't beat em join em. Only we are already joined.

A hegemonous Europe dominated by Germany and you say it's hardly comparable? The aims are the same; only the weapons have changed.

The consequences of Brexit, as described by you, are bullying by any definition you care to use. These are no 'trite platitudes', old chap. The long term objective is a European superstate with Britain surrendering more and more of its sovereignly as that aim is assiduously pursued. A vote for Brexit is a vote to expose the whole corrupt, unaccountable, ramshackle, artificial nature of the organisation for what it is.

"We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down".

Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

johnfirewall 28 May 16 11.15am
Originally posted by Kermit8 When all has been said and done not one of the 'Outs' on here or otherwise has convinced sufficiently that we will be better off economically away from the EU and that the peace in Western and central Europe that has evolved over the last 70 years will definitely not be compromised for the next 70 should the EU break up with not a little help from ourselves in June. Stop playing the economy card. We all know it's about the socialist ideals and that only racists are voting out.

johnfirewall

28 May 16 11.15am

Originally posted by Kermit8

Stop playing the economy card. We all know it's about the socialist ideals and that only racists are voting out.

Hoof Hearted 28 May 16 11.40am
Well me and the Mrs have already voted by post and its 2-0 to the Leave/Out campaign. Adios, Arrivederci, Au Revoir, Auf Wiedersehen etc Europe.

Hoof Hearted 28 May 16 11.40am

Well me and the Mrs have already voted by post and its 2-0 to the Leave/Out campaign.

Adios, Arrivederci, Au Revoir, Auf Wiedersehen etc Europe.

Slimey Toad Karsiyaka, North Cyprus 28 May 16 11.45am
Originally posted by Cucking Funt A hegemonous Europe dominated by Germany and you say it's hardly comparable? The aims are the same; only the weapons have changed. The consequences of Brexit, as described by you, are bullying by any definition you care to use. These are no 'trite platitudes', old chap. The long term objective is a European superstate with Britain surrendering more and more of its sovereignly as that aim is assiduously pursued. A vote for Brexit is a vote to expose the whole corrupt, unaccountable, ramshackle, artificial nature of the organisation for what it is. "We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down". I've said it before. Yes full sovereignty will return to Parliament, but what extra power and self-governance will I feel out of Europe?

Slimey Toad

Karsiyaka, North Cyprus 28 May 16 11.45am

Originally posted by Cucking Funt

A hegemonous Europe dominated by Germany and you say it's hardly comparable? The aims are the same; only the weapons have changed.

"We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down".

I've said it before. Yes full sovereignty will return to Parliament, but what extra power and self-governance will I feel out of Europe?

Page 59 of 1552 < 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 >

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

The Brexit Thread (LOCKED)

Site Map