[isleaiw1]

Originally Posted by Scoobyd

It's quite depressing to see the amount of people on here that seem to care two hoots for democracy.

Whatever your views on the rights or wrongs of leaving the fact that so many are perfectly happy to ignore the largest vote there's ever been for anything in the history of this country doesn't sit well with me. Imagine if the same thing was happening if the vote had been the other way around.

And people can say there's no benefits and it'll be a disaster and all these other things they think, yet don't actually know, but to stick two fingers up to a majority vote because you don't like the outcome, before it's even been implemented, is entirely undemocratic. Yet those same people will be lending their vote to the liberal 'democrats'. The irony meter is off the scale.

The irony of so many students who will now be voting for the Lib Dems after they despised them for screwing them over on tuition fees isn't lost either... fickle much?!

How do you think the 52% majority who voted will feel if their vote was to be ignored and revoked? I mean I ask the question, but it's clear anyone who would happily vote that way clearly doesn't care. It's a very dangerous road to go down and precedent to set in my opinion. If you think there's division now...

Hopefully the Conservatives can get the clean majority they need. A hung parliament will do the country absolutely no favours. We need a government to be able to govern and we need to get back to the focus being on our domestic agenda.

We also need Corbyn to be kicked into the long grass once and for all and to have a genuine, relevant, worthwhile opposition once more that can hold the government of the day to account. That's vital and something we've now lacked for years.

Damn it, why I looked back in here I don't know! Pissing in the wind in this thread!!

I am thinking that I respect those that voted leave. But that was 3.5 years ago and now we get another vote, on something different but where one of the key differentiators is leave or remain - or how we leave...

So we have done democracy, leave won, we have spent 3.5 years trying to deliver that manifesto and now we have a general election which may or may not change what is to be delivered...

Of course if Labour had ever decided what they stood for in the last 3.5 years we might not be in this mess - and they represent some of the most vehemently leave constituencies. Democracy hey....

[mcoops]

Originally Posted by Bryans69

I hear what you are saying, but wanting to put a customs union or something else into the deal is still like chopping your leg off, then saying, well, at least I can replace it with an artificial one, rather than a peg leg....

Lol. I don't disagree, and staying in still makes more sense to me. But I'm in 'least worst' territory at this point. And some of these models e.g. Norway Plus are materially different - lower EU contributions and partial or total exemptions e.g. ECJ jurisdiction, CAP, justice and home affairs policies, etc. This won't be enough for some leavers, but for me arguably honours the referendum whilst not entirely shooting ourselves in the face.

[Watsey]

Here's how I see it, and I'm going to ignore the SNP as they won't be on my ballot paper :

Conservative = Leave; lget Brexit done, Yes, there may be a price to pay, but it'll break the political deadlock and deliver on the outcome of the Referendum.

Labour = Remain (well, anything that Corbyn thinks will get him into power); tax anything with an income or assets; nationalise everything; bow to the unions; bankrupt the country because, fuck it, it's only money and someone else will sort it out after we lose the next election.

LibDem = Remain. The electorate have secretly enjoyed the past 3.5 years and deep down they are masochistically drawn to another hung parliament. Oh, and switching our stance on honouring the outcome of the Referendum is the right thing to do.

Brexit = We have a singular policy, which is now owned by the Conservatives. We don't know what to do now.

Others : not worth debating.

[Watsey]

Just skimming the BBC news and saw an article about Labour's nationalisation plans.

According to the CBI it'd cost an initial
£196B.

Whether it'd come from public borrowing or taxes, that's a massive bill to finance.

It also makes Brexit look cheap.

[TodmordenLad]

Originally Posted by Watsey

Just skimming the BBC news and saw an article about Labour's nationalisation plans.

According to the CBI it'd cost an initial
£196B.

Whether it'd come from public borrowing or taxes, that's a massive bill to finance.

It also makes Brexit look cheap.

I think that the figure was toned down slightly after publication but nonetheless it's approximately equal to the Exchequer's total annual revenues, iirc
Just another example of current Labour's bonkers ideology and economic illiteracy

[MashinBenzin]

Originally Posted by Scoobyd

It's quite depressing to see the amount of people on here that seem to care two hoots for democracy.

Whatever your views on the rights or wrongs of leaving the fact that so many are perfectly happy to ignore the largest vote there's ever been for anything in the history of this country doesn't sit well with me. Imagine if the same thing was happening if the vote had been the other way around.

And people can say there's no benefits and it'll be a disaster and all these other things they think, yet don't actually know, but to stick two fingers up to a majority vote because you don't like the outcome, before it's even been implemented, is entirely undemocratic. Yet those same people will be lending their vote to the liberal 'democrats'. The irony meter is off the scale.

The irony of so many students who will now be voting for the Lib Dems after they despised them for screwing them over on tuition fees isn't lost either... fickle much?!

How do you think the 52% majority who voted will feel if their vote was to be ignored and revoked? I mean I ask the question, but it's clear anyone who would happily vote that way clearly doesn't care. It's a very dangerous road to go down and precedent to set in my opinion. If you think there's division now...

Hopefully the Conservatives can get the clean majority they need. A hung parliament will do the country absolutely no favours. We need a government to be able to govern and we need to get back to the focus being on our domestic agenda.

We also need Corbyn to be kicked into the long grass once and for all and to have a genuine, relevant, worthwhile opposition once more that can hold the government of the day to account. That's vital and something we've now lacked for years.

Damn it, why I looked back in here I don't know! Pissing in the wind in this thread!!

To answer the main question, yes I don't care. The few brexiteers I know, I would not trust to boil a kettle.

[JNW1]

Originally Posted by Bryans69

At least remainers voted on a known quantity, ie what we have now, for better or for worse.

Remainers voted on what we had in June 2016 but how likely is that to stay unchanged? The EU have been quite open about where they want their project to go and I'd suggest a vote for Remain was - and is - more than likely a vote for ever closer political and economic integration (and we don't know how that would look).

Now some people obviously want that closer integration and that's fine, it's a perfectly reasonable position to adopt. However, for others it opens the door to the sort of risks that were being discussed a few posts back (the Eurozone, etc) and hence for them Remain isn't necessarily the safe option - and simple continuation of a known status quo - some would have you believe.

A bit of a pessimistic view of what Remaining in the EU could mean? Perhaps but let's not forget Gordon Brown set tests for the UK to join the Euro on becoming Chancellor and, while thankfully we failed them, it nevertheless showed a willingness amongst at least some politicians to consider joining. Remaining keeps that (amongst other things) a possibility which is not good IMO....

[JNW1]

Originally Posted by MashinBenzin

To answer the main question, yes I don't care. The few brexiteers I know, I would not trust to boil a kettle.

But surely you can see that attitude's the thin end of a very nasty wedge? Democracy means respecting all votes and not just the ones where the result happens to go in your favour....

[JD6]

Originally Posted by Scoobyd

It's quite depressing to see the amount of people on here that seem to care two hoots for democracy.

Whatever your views on the rights or wrongs of leaving the fact that so many are perfectly happy to ignore the largest vote there's ever been for anything in the history of this country doesn't sit well with me. Imagine if the same thing was happening if the vote had been the other way around.

We have no need to imagine what would have happened if it was 52/48 the other way. Nigel Farage spelt this out explicitly when he believed he had lost by that margin - he made it absolutely clear that he would press for another referendum unless he lost 2/3 to 1/3.

So I really can’t understand the democratic outrage. The Leave side would not have given up had they lost by a slender margin, and neither will the Remain side. Democracy didn’t end on that day in June 2016.

[gIzzE]

Originally Posted by Watsey

Just skimming the BBC news and saw an article about Labour's nationalisation plans.

According to the CBI it'd cost an initial
£196B.

Whether it'd come from public borrowing or taxes, that's a massive bill to finance.

It also makes Brexit look cheap.

As McDonnell said, it is not really going to cost anything, as all the profits would cover the loan.

Yeah, of course they will John, of course they will.



Plus with the 50% increase in corporation tax that would cover nearly 1/5th of the purchase price as well.
Apart from the small fact that when corp tax was dropped to 19% we saw an increase of revenue, up from £30b to £56b within a few years.
Now, some argue a smaller cut might have seen larger revenues, however, many have said that the large corporations wouldn't have moved large chunks of their operations back to the UK if the tax rate hadn't been so appealing.
Increasing corp tax will see people just move operations elsewhere, why wouldn't they?



Then we have the £21000 minimum wage.
Great idea, but you will see a generations of youngsters never given a chance, it will hit those who struggle on the wage ladder most of all.
Why bother taking on a youngster and train them when you can get someone who can already do it walk straight into the role for that money?

We took on a young lad who struggles a bit, to be honest he was not worth the £7 an hour we paid him at the time, he cost us the same again in time with some one chaperoning him, but he really enjoyed it, he loved working as a team and was genuinely thrilled to get his pay packet. More than that though it gave him a confidence boost and his parents a bit of free time.

Would we take him on if we had to pay £21k? Hate to say it but no.


Labour would be an economic disaster for the country, and they would hurt the most vulnerable in society after the initial injection of borrowing had run out and the realisation that the debt repayments were....a bit tricky.

Labour know how to play people, people who don't understand basic economics, just promise everything for free and hope more people don't crunch the numbers than do.
With the UK population, you could be onto a winner.


Luckily, the last few elections people have seen through it, the issue you now have is a generation of voters who don't remember how much they fucked up last time economically, let alone the time before.


There is not much difference between voters imho. We all want better education, NHS, policing, fire services, etc. etc.
The main difference between voters are those that understand basic economics and those that don't, I totally get why people don't really try and work out the economics of it all, it is boring.

No one can disagree with Labours policies really, in theory they are all magical, they are what everyone wants, problem is, how do you pay for them? Or will the revenue generating policies actually generate any revenue?


The other thing is those that have to take some financial responsibility in their work, even a private sector worker who has to work with a budget will think far more inline with Tory thinking than someone who just picks up their PAYE at the end of the month in the same company.
One will see running a company is a financial struggle, which it is for 90% of businesses out there.

Work in the public sector and I would guess anyone who doesn't want to give you more money year in year out (tories) are evil.



I crunched the numbers for my business if Labour got into power with their financial policies, we would go bust within months, that is after 20 years.
I mentioned this on a retail group Linkedin group I am part of and I ran through the figures for 7 other retailers, they would all go bust with their current set up.
Three out of 8 could possibly survive, they were the ones where they had enough staff to be able to lay off 25% of them and still just about cover the business needs.

That is what the UK is up against with the current Labour party in charge.
It would take our minds of Brexit, that's for sure.

[JNW1]

Originally Posted by JD6

We have no need to imagine what would have happened if it was 52/48 the other way. Nigel Farage spelt this out explicitly when he believed he had lost by that margin - he made it absolutely clear that he would press for another referendum unless he lost 2/3 to 1/3.

So I really can’t understand the democratic outrage. The Leave side would not have given up had they lost by a slender margin, and neither will the Remain side. Democracy didn’t end on that day in June 2016.

I can only speak for myself but if Remain had won in 2016 that would have been the end of the matter as far as I'm concerned. We were told repeatedly during the campaign that it was a once in a lifetime opportunity to have a say on the issue and if Leave had lost I don't actually think the likes of Nigel Farage would have had much support for a re-run.

In truth I was never in favour of holding the referendum back in 2016 but we did and having done so I think it would be very dangerous to avoid the outcome. I think a significant number of those who voted Leave were probably already feeling sidelined and disenfranchised in some way and if they express a view at the ballot box only for the political establishment to stick two fingers up at them that's hardly going to make them feel valued or included in society. If people start to feel the ballot box and the democratic process is a waste of time we're on a slippery slope IMO....

[gIzzE]

All I want know is, if that Swinson wins with Lib Dems, will we tear up the result and simply ignore it? Boris carries on as is?

[Bryans69]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

All I want know is, if that Swinson wins with Lib Dems, will we tear up the result and simply ignore it? Boris carries on as is?

Pointless comment really, however facetious. We've had plenty of elections, and know how they work. We've not done Brexit before, and it's pretty tricky when you can't even agree what you are actually supposed to be trying to implement.

[mcoops]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

All I want know is, if that Swinson wins with Lib Dems, will we tear up the result and simply ignore it? Boris carries on as is?

Peace in the middle east before Christmas more likely than the Lib Dems being the biggest party.

[TodmordenLad]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

As McDonnell said, it is not really going to cost anything, as all the profits would cover the loan.

Yeah, of course they will John, of course they will.



Plus with the 50% increase in corporation tax that would cover nearly 1/5th of the purchase price as well.
Apart from the small fact that when corp tax was dropped to 19% we saw an increase of revenue, up from £30b to £56b within a few years.
Now, some argue a smaller cut might have seen larger revenues, however, many have said that the large corporations wouldn't have moved large chunks of their operations back to the UK if the tax rate hadn't been so appealing.
Increasing corp tax will see people just move operations elsewhere, why wouldn't they?



Then we have the £21000 minimum wage.
Great idea, but you will see a generations of youngsters never given a chance, it will hit those who struggle on the wage ladder most of all.
Why bother taking on a youngster and train them when you can get someone who can already do it walk straight into the role for that money?

We took on a young lad who struggles a bit, to be honest he was not worth the £7 an hour we paid him at the time, he cost us the same again in time with some one chaperoning him, but he really enjoyed it, he loved working as a team and was genuinely thrilled to get his pay packet. More than that though it gave him a confidence boost and his parents a bit of free time.

Would we take him on if we had to pay £21k? Hate to say it but no.


Labour would be an economic disaster for the country, and they would hurt the most vulnerable in society after the initial injection of borrowing had run out and the realisation that the debt repayments were....a bit tricky.

Labour know how to play people, people who don't understand basic economics, just promise everything for free and hope more people don't crunch the numbers than do.
With the UK population, you could be onto a winner.


Luckily, the last few elections people have seen through it, the issue you now have is a generation of voters who don't remember how much they fucked up last time economically, let alone the time before.


There is not much difference between voters imho. We all want better education, NHS, policing, fire services, etc. etc.
The main difference between voters are those that understand basic economics and those that don't, I totally get why people don't really try and work out the economics of it all, it is boring.

No one can disagree with Labours policies really, in theory they are all magical, they are what everyone wants, problem is, how do you pay for them? Or will the revenue generating policies actually generate any revenue?


The other thing is those that have to take some financial responsibility in their work, even a private sector worker who has to work with a budget will think far more inline with Tory thinking than someone who just picks up their PAYE at the end of the month in the same company.
One will see running a company is a financial struggle, which it is for 90% of businesses out there.

Work in the public sector and I would guess anyone who doesn't want to give you more money year in year out (tories) are evil.



I crunched the numbers for my business if Labour got into power with their financial policies, we would go bust within months, that is after 20 years.
I mentioned this on a retail group Linkedin group I am part of and I ran through the figures for 7 other retailers, they would all go bust with their current set up.
Three out of 8 could possibly survive, they were the ones where they had enough staff to be able to lay off 25% of them and still just about cover the business needs.

That is what the UK is up against with the current Labour party in charge.
It would take our minds of Brexit, that's for sure.

Agreed
A Labour govt under Corbyn/McDonnell would make a hard Brexit look like a walk in the park.
These fossils want to reshape British society based on a fundamental redistribution of wealth and assets. Good old fashioned Marxist socialism.
If anyone thinks that they'd see a PV, and the UK potentially remaining in the EU, if they voted in a Labour govt, they've been duped. For Corbyn/McDonnell, the EU is and always has been a capitalist construct, which would stand in the way of their plans for a UK state dominated, redesigned society. They want Brexit and they want it to crash. Their brand of disaster socialism is based on the idea that revolutionary change is not possible without the collapse of the current order and that collapse has to be encouraged. Brexit provides the perfect opportunity to create a new socialist order out of the ensuing chaos. The top leaders of the two main parties all want Brexit but for fundamentally different ideological reasons.
Brace, brace...

[Wills2]

Originally Posted by Scoobyd

It's quite depressing to see the amount of people on here that seem to care two hoots for democracy.

So the fact I voted remain and didn't vote to visit this shit show on the country and I'm now exercising my democratic right to vote for the Liberal party in a GE called by the HoC is undemocratic? RIIIIIIIIIGHT.....

We've been given two deals the first one blocked 3 times by brexiters for not being shit enough (sorry hard enough) you couldn't make this stuff up you really couldn't.

Honestly I give up, brexiters must have a missing gene.....

[JD6]

Originally Posted by gIzzE

All I want know is, if that Swinson wins with Lib Dems, will we tear up the result and simply ignore it? Boris carries on as is?

No, we’ll let Swinson try and deliver her manifesto promises. If it becomes apparent after a few years that the manifesto was an undeliverable fantasy sold to the gullible, which in practice will make us all worse off, then the electorate will remove her and try another approach...

[Scoobyd]

Originally Posted by Wills2

So the fact I voted remain and didn't vote to visit this shit show on the country and I'm now exercising my democratic right to vote for the Liberal party in a GE called by the HoC is undemocratic? RIIIIIIIIIGHT.....

Ah, so it's your kind of democracy you're on board with.

[Scoobyd]

I often see this "we've had 3.5 years to sort this out" argument but anyone that's been following this knows that's largely because all bar the last 3 months of that 3.5 years we had a PM, and certainly a Chancellor, that were never fully committed to leaving and handled the negotiations, if you can even call them that, in a terrible fashion. Boris seems to have got more out of the EU in terms of a deal in 3 months than May did in 3 years.

We've also had a parliament and a speaker that has constantly attempted to block us leaving at every turn. So it's pretty disingenuous to say we've had 3.5 years to sort this out.

Everyone knew leaving the EU wouldn't be easy, it's not in their interests to make it so. But I don't think any of us truly expected just how parliament would behave and renege on their manifestos and promises. Hence why so many MP's are now jumping off cliffs like lemmings with the impending GE, before the electorate pushes them.

[MashinBenzin]

Originally Posted by JD6

No, we'll let Swinson try and deliver her manifesto promises. If it becomes apparent after a few years that the manifesto was an undeliverable fantasy sold to the gullible, which in practice will make us all worse off, then the electorate will remove her and try another approach...

Ooh, would that be democratic? Is this vote not our one and only chance?

[MashinBenzin]

Originally Posted by Scoobyd

Ah, so it's your kind of democracy you're on board with.

Not sure how closely you have followed the discussions on here over the years, but Wills2 has stated many times that, although he voted remain he felt that brexit should be delivered. I think you are picking the wrong fight in the usual brexiteer way. Sorry Wills if I am misquoting.

Now circumstances mean we can all cast a vote - why should we vote for what someone else wants? As I stated above, the brexiteers that I personally know, I would not trust to decide my future. My previous post softened the message, but more bluntly they are a collection of non-achieving, lazy, xenophobes or racists, mixed with long retired folk with little to no understanding of how the modern world works. That's only 90% of them, the other 10% are decent.

I'm not suggesting that my cross section of society is the same as yours, but nonetheless it pushes me even further towards wanting to remain.

I've never really wanted to see brexit delivered since the vote, but the shit-show since, the fact that the brexiteers are the ones that prevented it AND the evidence of my ears and eyes, tell me ever more strongly that this is something I do not want for my country. Yes, my country - it's not only brexiteers that can invoke patriotism.

[JNW1]

Originally Posted by MashinBenzin

Ooh, would that be democratic? Is this vote not our one and only chance?

Yes, implementing the result of one election and reversing the decision at the next would be perfectly democratic. What wouldn't be democratic would be to avoid the result and demand another election without the Lib Dems ever being allowed to take office....