Brexit Two Months On

Status
Not open for further replies.
SocketRocket said:
Your post is so full of inaccuracies it's bordering on ridiculous. The introduction of the Minimum Wage by the Labour Government in 1999 was absolutely nothing to do with the EU, how on earth do you come about that little gem :confused:

If you think immigration was not a major factor in the vote to leave the EU then you must have been off with the faeries for the last few years.

So the EU subsidies Farmers do they! Where does this subsidy come from then, some big box of gold in Brussels that is self generating? It's paid for by UK tax payers and will continue to be paid for by them.

You suggest that because we leave the EU labour costs will rise, how exactly does that work, if the workers are paid the minimum wage then they will still be paid the minimum wage, there's no difference. You suggest that we will have no immigrant workforce, how exactly do you come to that conclusion? you seem to be struggling with the fact that no one is suggesting we have no immigration, only that we have the ability to control it. Please write out 100 times "No one is suggesting we have no immigration"

So! once again, leaving is a changing factor due to the UK regaining control as an independent country free to manage their lives as they see fit.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting we made our own laws regarding wages ? If so that's good is it not? maybe doesn't justify leaving
yes we pay in that is understood, it was never mentioned because it was a given fact. But that was not the point....the point was it's the supermarkets that drive the cost down not the EU, who supported the farmers ... you missed that

Nor have you grasped the other point- immigration will not be affected, they will get here, irrespective of our membership to the EU. We have full border controls, we are letting them in or not protecting our borders well enough! You missed this as well because it makes no affect to leaving ...

As per usual you read a post and ignore the comments let the emotion take hold that few people agree with your pretty ill informed view and then ramble on.
Present an argument and a solution of note (you have had x 100s posts on this thread to so far and not managed it)
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
If you hadn't heard this then you've not been paying attention.

And I am not anti-Brexit. I can't be - because we are Brexitting. But I would like to hear some thought through answers to some pretty basic questions about how Brexit will work - and stupid and random ideas like this one confirm the fear that they don't know we are now in Project Muddle.
Click to expand...
You don't seem to grasp the concept of negotiation.
 
@SR - you have said in the Indeyref2 thread that I should understand that Brexit means Control of immigration, Sovereignty of our law making and the best trade deal possible. and ask is that not clear to me yet. I'll add spend £350m/week more on.the NHS (or other public services) as a third, as getting the best traded deal would be a given.

Well I certainly understand that these were the key factors that would have influenced Leave voters - but there is no referendum mandate for all three - there is a mandate (if we accept that the referendum was not advisory even although legally it was) for leaving the EU as that is what was on the ballot paper - there was no definition of Leave provided for the vote.

And so of course neither you - nor I - nor indeed anyone, knows the numbers of Leave voters who voted that way on the basis of any one, any pair - or indeed all three of these things, we don't know - we will never know. But I suggest to you that the number who voted wishing all three absolutely might not actually be in the majority over Remain. Of course we do not know and never will - unless that is we get told what the governments definition of Leave is - or what it ends up as after 2yrs negotiation - and indeed we will not know if that is what the electorate voted for in the referendum unless it gets to vote on it - to advise the government.

The government has a mandate to exit UK from the EU - and it is beholding upon it to get the best possible deal Exit deal. It has no other mandate from the electorate - certainly there is zero mandate for leaving the single market.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
...I'll add spend £350m/week more on.the NHS (or other public services) as a third, as getting the best traded deal would be a given.
...
Click to expand...
That was never a pledge! Nor was/is it ever a realistic possibility!

Plus, at least it's my belief, ALL the 'EU Funded' grants/subsidies/funding (like any farming, fishing and scientific research ones) would have to come out of that allocation -which is, of course less than that anyway, because of UK's Rebate.

Here's a simple and realistic explanation - with pictures even!

https://infacts.org/uk-doesnt-send-eu-350m-a-week-or-55m-a-day/

SwingsitlikeHogan said:
The government has a mandate to exit UK from the EU - and it is beholding upon it to get the best possible deal Exit deal. It has no other mandate from the electorate - certainly there is zero mandate for leaving the single market.
Click to expand...

I disagree with your logic! Brexit almost certainly meant leaving the single market!

A 'best deal' might well include 'access to the single market', though I suspect there would be a cost to this - Freedom of Movement being unacceptable!
 
Last edited:
Foxholer said:
That was never a pledge! Nor was/is it ever a realistic possibility!

Plus, at least it's my belief, ALL the 'EU Funded' grants/subsidies/funding (like any farming, fishing and scientific research ones) would have to come out of that allocation -which is, of course less than that anyway, because of UK's Rebate.

Here's a simple and realistic explanation - with pictures even!

https://infacts.org/uk-doesnt-send-eu-350m-a-week-or-55m-a-day/



I disagree with your logic! Brexit almost certainly meant leaving the single market!

A 'best deal' might well include 'access to the single market', though I suspect there would be a cost to this - Freedom of Movement being unacceptable!
Click to expand...

The £350m/week tosh was understood by many as a pledge and the Leave campaign did NOTHING to repudiate that as a misconception. They just let it run because if it helped their cause - then all to the good. The fact that it was never a realistic possibility was fully explained and exposed as being unrealistic - but these explanations were provided by experts - and to make matters worse - experts in cahoots with Remain - and as Gove told us “I think people in this country have had enough of experts”
 
Last edited:
Foxholer said:
That was never a pledge! Nor was/is it ever a realistic possibility!

Plus, at least it's my belief, ALL the 'EU Funded' grants/subsidies/funding (like any farming, fishing and scientific research ones) would have to come out of that allocation -which is, of course less than that anyway, because of UK's Rebate.

Here's a simple and realistic explanation - with pictures even!

https://infacts.org/uk-doesnt-send-eu-350m-a-week-or-55m-a-day/



I disagree with your logic! Brexit almost certainly meant leaving the single market!

A 'best deal' might well include 'access to the single market', though I suspect there would be a cost to this - Freedom of Movement being unacceptable!
Click to expand...

But you have to say 'almost certainly' - because it was not an option on the ballot paper and as we did not have definition of Leave you just cannot actually say that - however much it might have been implied or understood.

And again - that leavinbg the sinbgle market was not not trumpeted loud and clear with explanations of the impact it might have (other than by those dratted 'experts agaoin). So many times I heard leading Brexiteers claim that UK was always going to be able to get a good deal with the 'single market' because trade with the UK is so important to the rEU- indeed the deal would be as good as, if not better, than the one we have from being 'part of'.

Bottom line is that Leave single market was not on the ballot paper.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
It was understood by many as a pledge and the Leave campaign did NOTHING to repudiate that as a misconception. They just let it run because if it helped their cause - then all to the good. The fact that it was never a realistic possibility was fully explained and exposed as being unrealistic - but these explanations were provided by experts - and to make matters worse - experts in cahoots with Remain - and as Gove told us “I think people in this country have had enough of experts”
Click to expand...

Those slogans were roundly poo-poo-ed and ridiculed by so many that nobody could have ever been under the impression that they were anything near the truth! Similar exaggeration was used by the remainers!

It wasn't the actual value that Brexiters were (partly) voting for, but it was a good slogan all the same! Had it been for a commercial organisation, the Advertising Standards Association would have jumped on it very smartly! But, unfortunately, political campaigns have no such supervisory body, so misleading statements and outright lies are all part of the 'game'!
 
Foxholer said:
Those slogans were roundly poo-poo-ed and ridiculed by so many that nobody could have ever been under the impression that they were anything near the truth! Similar exaggeration was used by the remainers!

It wasn't the actual value that Brexiters were (partly) voting for, but it was a good slogan all the same! Had it been for a commercial organisation, the Advertising Standards Association would have jumped on it very smartly! But, unfortunately, political campaigns have no such supervisory body, so misleading statements and outright lies are all part of the 'game'!
Click to expand...

Not quite - you should listen to the rationale some leave voters give for their vote - try listening to James O'Brien (LBC) talking to the electrician

http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/which-eu-law-are-you-looking-forward-to-losing/

And exaggerating a prediction is not the same as exaggerating a fact. Remain might have done the former - Leave did the latter.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
...
And exaggerating a prediction is not the same as exaggerating a fact. Remain might have done the former - Leave did the latter.
Click to expand...

It's still lying - at least in my book! But that's politics and I wasn't swayed by either numbers! Whether others were or not, I haven't a clue - nor do I care much. Boris was asked the equivalent of that question during the campaign and fudged (lied) for an answer!

Whatever, the result stands and UK must now prepare for and undertake Brexit! Some of the 'downsides' appear to be arriving and continuing uncertainty probably won't help in the short term. However, adequate preparation will likely mean a better 'result' overall. I'm sure there is a lot of, no doubt very expensive, work going on already!
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
But you have to say 'almost certainly' - because it was not an option on the ballot paper and as we did not have definition of Leave you just cannot actually say that - however much it might have been implied or understood.

And again - that leavinbg the sinbgle market was not not trumpeted loud and clear with explanations of the impact it might have (other than by those dratted 'experts agaoin). So many times I heard leading Brexiteers claim that UK was always going to be able to get a good deal with the 'single market' because trade with the UK is so important to the rEU- indeed the deal would be as good as, if not better, than the one we have from being 'part of'.

Bottom line is that Leave single market was not on the ballot paper.
Click to expand...

If we want full access to the Single Market then we would probably have to accept Free Movement, EU Law and Pay a membership fee so it wouldn't be Brexit at all. Brexit means leaving the EU, not staying as a member in a different suit of clothes. The reason you cant have your pre-negotiation terms laid out in black and white is because it's up to the EU to stipulate what access we get to the market and the terms and conditions they wish to apply. We can the consider this, give counter claims and then through discussions or a slammed door decide how we wish to proceed.

Regarding the £350 million a week, we all know that nothing can be used until we have left the EU as we are still paying our contributions. The amount was an extrapolation of how much we would pay if the rebate was eroded and everyone knew when they went to the ballot box it was and exaggeration and not the amount we would get back now. It's getting a bit hackneyed now just like Osbornes £4,300 per household.
 
harpo_72 said:
Are you suggesting we made our own laws regarding wages ? If so that's good is it not? maybe doesn't justify leaving
yes we pay in that is understood, it was never mentioned because it was a given fact. But that was not the point....the point was it's the supermarkets that drive the cost down not the EU, who supported the farmers ... you missed that

Nor have you grasped the other point- immigration will not be affected, they will get here, irrespective of our membership to the EU. We have full border controls, we are letting them in or not protecting our borders well enough! You missed this as well because it makes no affect to leaving ...

As per usual you read a post and ignore the comments let the emotion take hold that few people agree with your pretty ill informed view and then ramble on.
Present an argument and a solution of note (you have had x 100s posts on this thread to so far and not managed it)
Click to expand...
Wall, Head, Bang, Bang, Bang!

You now blame Supermarkets but never mentioned that in your previous post. You do like moving the goal posts to suit the shortcomings in your posts. I explained it's the tax payer that supports Farmers but again it went in one of your ears and out the other.

I explained that no one is suggesting there would be no immigration but rather that we have control over it. The numbers getting in illegally are very small compared to the 600,000 that we take in these days. Are you suggesting 600,000 illegal immigrants would arrive each year?

Emotion! are you serious. This is a Golf Forum where mainly ageing middle class people like us with too much time on their hands waste our time telling others that they are wrong and only our own opinion counts! Ha Ha Ha, Ha ha ha ha ha!!!! I'm splitting my sides, Emotion taking hold !! you are a drama queen. :rofl:
 
SocketRocket said:
If we want full access to the Single Market then we would probably have to accept Free Movement, EU Law and Pay a membership fee so it wouldn't be Brexit at all. Brexit means leaving the EU, not staying as a member in a different suit of clothes. The reason you cant have your pre-negotiation terms laid out in black and white is because it's up to the EU to stipulate what access we get to the market and the terms and conditions they wish to apply. We can the consider this, give counter claims and then through discussions or a slammed door decide how we wish to proceed.
Click to expand...
I'd be hoping - and it was certainly one of the stated aims/hopes of the Brexit crew - that access to the single market, perhaps with some sort of fee (aka Norway/EEA style or similar) would be achievable without having to accept Free Movement or (non-trade relevant) EU Law.

The current 'cost of membership' is not a 'membership fee', but a levy according to 'ability to provide/need' based on the GDP of UK compared with other members GDPs/'ability to provide/need'! Even if the fee was based on the value of trade (so actually a trade tariff in different clothes! :rolleyes:) it would be something to aim for. But (fully) Free Movement is something that has to be off the agenda!

Certain trading standards would have to be met - sufficient to attain CE marking - but there should be no requirement to obey non-trade relate laws (actually 'regulations') or directives made by the EU - so talk of an EU Army is irrelevant to UK. It becomes the UK Parliament that makes ALL the Laws of UK - as opposed to some being made by The EU Council and EU Parliament - and the European Court of Justice would be irrelevant to UK - with Judgement and Appeals (except on Human Rights) stopping at The Supreme Court.

The final arbiter of Human Rights should still be the European Court of Human Rights, which is not an EU body! I suspect there will be some who would like to sever this link too - but it not a Brexit consideration and, imo, should be strongly resisted anyway!

There does appear to be some pre-(pre-)negotiation 'terms' being bandied about, but it's the role of the UK Departments to find an acceptable position! A de facto return to membership (acceptance of all EU laws including Free Movement for access to Single Market), with or without a fee, would actually be the worst possible result! The other areas that those Department(s) need to consider is how (or indeed whether!) to provide those subsidies/grants that current recipients get from EU (with contribution from UK Government also).
 
Last edited:
Foxholer said:
It's still lying - at least in my book! But that's politics and I wasn't swayed by either numbers! Whether others were or not, I haven't a clue - nor do I care much. Boris was asked the equivalent of that question during the campaign and fudged (lied) for an answer!

Whatever, the result stands and UK must now prepare for and undertake Brexit! Some of the 'downsides' appear to be arriving and continuing uncertainty probably won't help in the short term. However, adequate preparation will likely mean a better 'result' overall. I'm sure there is a lot of, no doubt very expensive, work going on already!
Click to expand...

I'm with this though I don't agree about both sides lying (you can't lie about the future - you can exaggerate) - and rather just hoping rather than expecting a better long term outcome. It won't impact me - I'm not far from retirement - but it will impact my children - so I just hope...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Orikoru
Worst Ryder Cup Captains?
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
5K
Lucifer MorningStar
Lucifer MorningStar
R
H4H IMPORTANT DETAILS 18TH AUGUST 2025 - PLEASE READ
Replies
1
Views
1K
richart
R
M
Anyone know brand of these vintage rusty clubs, scotland made
Replies
3
Views
1K
Crow
Crow
Orikoru
New Year's Resolutions
Replies
11
Views
2K
Hobbit
Hobbit
R
  • Sticky
Help 4 Heroes 18th August 2025 Blackmoor Golf Club
14 15 16
Replies
315
Views
38K
Slime
Slime
Top