Second vote ? Why not .?

[chrisd]

When we vote at a General Election we know it's for a limited period, when we voted for Brexit we knew it was permanent - Exactly what I said. - except you used this to try and justify having another go at a "once only vote" and not accept the true democracy of the original vote

No, you didn't say ALL 17m were a protest vote but suggested it was a significant number which isn't provable. - \polls have suggested that it would have been enough to alter the vote - even if 5-10% of those that voted leave did it as a protest and either didnt vote, or voted the other way would see a different result. - or as I'd put it "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle" I've seen Governments at General Elections formed with smaller majorities but never a re vote cos we didn't like the result

I wouldn't have wanted a 2nd vote, just like many Remainers who don't because they rely on democracy. Also, lies WERE told by both sides - Easy to say that now, and yes lies were told by both sides, but the big one was by the leavers. - simply not true, "project fear" was every much a pack of lies as any told by brexiteers and if we voted again the two sides would lie again.

 

[SocketRocket]

In the words of Foxholer......Er No!

I said the Irish had a good reason for remaining. They was trousering loads of loot.

I said WE have a good reason for leaving....they are bleeding us white. (imo)

The reason the Irish changed their mind i do not know but if i had to guess i would say that they was subjected to an endless barrage of democracy deniers wailing on about how disastrous it would be.

And can you really say anyone is better informed? No one knows whats going to happen, I expect we will end up somewhere between Project Fear and Project Bullshit, and much like the Millennium Bug most people will be unaffected.

Ireland like Greece went on a spending fest with Eu money, Germany were happy to let them when they were buying their products. Eventually the bubble burst and the EU cut off the money supply, the UK were very generous in helping to bail them out. They had the option of remaining with Eu austerity or going bankrupt.

Were better off out from this failed project.

 

[bluewolf]

In the words of Foxholer......Er No!

I said the Irish had a good reason for remaining. They was trousering loads of loot.

I said WE have a good reason for leaving....they are bleeding us white. (imo)

The reason the Irish changed their mind i do not know but if i had to guess i would say that they was subjected to an endless barrage of democracy deniers wailing on about how disastrous it would be.

And can you really say anyone is better informed? No one knows whats going to happen, I expect we will end up somewhere between Project Fear and Project Bullshit, and much like the Millennium Bug most people will be unaffected.

Still avoiding the actual point though. Did Ireland make the right choice the 2nd time around. All the evidence points to a "YES".

Also quite telling that you reference the Millenium Bug. You are aware of the vast amounts of work that went on in the background to make it look like it was not a problem? I would look into it. It's quite eye opening.

 

[bluewolf]

Ireland like Greece went on a spending fest with Eu money, Germany were happy to let them when they were buying their products. Eventually the bubble burst and the EU cut off the money supply, the UK were very generous in helping to bail them out. They had the option of remaining with Eu austerity or going bankrupt.

Were better off out from this failed project.

Ireland has already paid over E400m in interest payments alone since 2010. And is still a net contributor to the EU.
And if Irelands banks needing money makes them a basket case Economy then heaven forbid you take a closer look at our financial institutions at the same time 😂

 

[ColchesterFC]

The article you've quoted states that since 2014, Ireland have been a net contributor. This means that they've used the £50b to improve infrastructure and industry. They've improved the Economy to such a point that they've started paying back that "debt". I'd say that makes them a success story, does it not.
And since they've become a net contributor, they've still voted to stay by a margin of 9:1.
Can you imagine where they'd be if they hadn't joined?

Is it possible that Ireland are a net contributor now because "poorer" countries than them have joined the EU? In the earlier years were Ireland considered one of the poorer countries but as the EU expanded new worse off countries than them have joined they have moved up the list to the point that they now contribute rather than receive?


P.S. I have no idea which is why I'm asking this as a question rather than making a suggestion or statement.

 

[bluewolf]

Is it possible that Ireland are a net contributor now because "poorer" countries than them have joined the EU? In the earlier years were Ireland considered one of the poorer countries but as the EU expanded new worse off countries than them have joined they have moved up the list to the point that they now contribute rather than receive?

P.S. I have no idea which is why I'm asking this as a question rather than making a suggestion or statement.

It's a good question and I couldn't really explain fully why they're now a net contributor. I'm not convinced that the contributions are based on a sliding scale of success though. It's worth looking into 👍

Edit - Just re-checked and a countries EU contributions are calculated using GNI (gross national income). This means that as the Irish economy has grown at an individual level (not just a Corporate one) then their contributions have grown.

 

[Dando]

Biggest lie told was on the side of a bus was it not

It’s only a lie if they promised that money would be spent on the NHS

 

[MegaSteve]

Biggest lie told was on the side of a bus was it not

Nope... It came from the mouth of #evilinasuit Carney... And, to make it worse he's started to pedal the same line again...

Now, this would be bad enough if it was Labour that was running the house...
But it's not... It's the tory boys 'n girls whose cornerstone of electioneering, for the last 4/5 decades, has been house ownership for the many...

 

[chrisd]

Biggest lie told was on the side of a bus was it not

Most of the prominent leavers had said long before voting day that the bus was not accurate and disassociated themselves from it, I especially remember Farage saying that it was not necessarily the right amount of money but that the money not given to the EU annually would benefit the UK

 

[Deleted member 18121]

I notice the bus thing has come back up again and for me it is the biggest cop out of them all and is a lazy argument. The slogan on the side of the bus said "we send the EU £350 million a week lets fund our NHS instead vote leave".

Firstly, that slogan was written by a campaign team for brexit and NOT by those that have the power to make a decision on how to fund the NHS.
Secondly, it quite clearly does NOT say that of the £350 million any of it would be used to fund the NHS, let alone all of it.

Those that use it as the "lies" argument have chosen to read between the lines, make up their own story and spin their own agenda trying to make out it was some kind of promise, it quite clearly was not a promise of any sort but showed how the money could be used.

 

[AmandaJR]

Isn't there already a 50+ page thread on this? Get back on there and continue to argue about everything Brexit apart the second vote this one is about!

 

[ColchesterFC]

It's a good question and I couldn't really explain fully why they're now a net contributor. I'm not convinced that the contributions are based on a sliding scale of success though. It's worth looking into 👍

Edit - Just re-checked and a countries EU contributions are calculated using GNI (gross national income). This means that as the Irish economy has grown at an individual level (not just a Corporate one) then their contributions have grown.

I'm offshore so our internet is rubbish but is there somewhere that shows EU contributions each year? Just wondering if Ireland is now a net contributor because its annual payments have increased considerably or because EU payments to Ireland have decreased significantly?

As an example (figures plucked from thin air) if Ireland have been paying £500 million per year since they joined and up to 2014 were receiving £750 million from the EU but after 2014 they were still paying £500 million but only getting £300 million back (because the rest was being given to the new poorer countries) then they have become a net contributor without any change to their economy.

 

[bluewolf]

So as an outsider (technicaly) and following coverage on different meda outlets if the leave side are so sure leaving is still what the majority want , why not have a second vote .?

The way I see it the ordinary joe soaps on the street now have a good if not better idea of the advantages /disadvantages of the result..
I have no doubt both sides enhanced the good and bad to influence the vote their way .

Now all this is about to get very very serious why not give the people a chance to change their mind , either way, and get a result you know for definite the majority want ..

Has any1 really got anything to lose by a second vote ? If the majority still see out as the best option, it will be out, but if some feel they. mistakenly voted or voted without the full info of consequences haven't they got the right to change their minds

Just interested in how you the real people feel , any of ye want a second vote or happy to go with first result ?

Hey Bill. How about we throw it back to you. As a representative of a country that rejected the EU, then had a 2nd vote forced upon you, then voted for the EU.

How did you feel then and how do you feel now. I'm genuinely interested in your POV as I'm sure we can learn something 👍

 

[bluewolf]

I'm offshore so our internet is rubbish but is there somewhere that shows EU contributions each year? Just wondering if Ireland is now a net contributor because its annual payments have increased considerably or because EU payments to Ireland have decreased significantly?

As an example (figures plucked from thin air) if Ireland have Benn paying £500 million per year since they joined and up to 2014 were receiving £750 million from the EU but after 2014 they were still paying £500 million but only getting £300 million back (because the rest was being given to the new poorer countries) then they have become a net contributor without any change to their economy.

I think it's a bit of both. Their contributions have increased along with independent wealth. Their money back has decreased as most of the major infrastructure work has been completed. I'm far from an expert though so I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[Foxholer]

I've seen numerous mentions on here regarding Countries that have voted agaist the EU, then have been "forced" to have another vote so that the "correct decision" was reached. The most famous of these obviously being the Republic of Ireland.

Now here's the interesting thing. There was recently a poll in Ireland regarding whether they'd like to leave the EU. 90% voted against leaving. 90%!!! Even allowing for statistical error and inherent bias, that's still a huge number. It's almost as though they almost made a huge mistake, but at the last minute recognised that they didn't have to commit themselves to it.

Anyhoo, here's an article from the time about that decision. The language is pretty striking is it not?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....ntisfree/2008/dec/13/eu-ireland-lisbon-treaty

Oh, and here's an article showing the recent poll.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/more-than-90-of-irish-people-want-to-stay-in-eu-poll-reveals-1.3488112?mode=amp

Irish law requires that changes to EU Treaties require an amendment to the Irish Constitution. An amendment to the Irish Constitution requires a referendum. That referendum rejected it, so the Irish government and EU renegotiated the treaty and came up with one that was acceptable to the Irish electorate in the (required) referendum. It was not the EU that forced the Irish to have another vote; it was the Irish electorate that required the EU to change the treaty so that it was acceptable to the Irish electorate! According to both major polls subsequent to the rejection, the major reason was simply that the treaty was not understood! Irish identity, neutrality and a lack of trust of politicians were other major reasons!

That strikes me as a demonstration of the power the electorate can have over those that 'rule'!

The Irish (effectively) renegotiated the treaty, adding protection for their concerns.

The Irish economy happened to be significant trouble when the 2nd referendum took place. Membership of the EU meant that significant assistance/support could/would be obtained from the EU, so that, along with the renegotiation 'changed the minds' of the Irish electorate and the 2nd referendum was passed by a 2:1.

The subsequent success of the Irish economy could be deemed a success story for the EU also! I believe that this 'success story' is the reason for the overwhelming desire by the Irish to stay in the EU.

 

[Foxholer]

...As a representative of a country that rejected the EU, then had a 2nd vote forced upon you, then voted for the EU.
...

See above why the bit in bold is a myth!

 

[Liverbirdie]

When we vote at a General Election we know it's for a limited period, when we voted for Brexit we knew it was permanent - Exactly what I said. - except you used this to try and justify having another go at a "once only vote" and not accept the true democracy of the original vote

No, you didn't say ALL 17m were a protest vote but suggested it was a significant number which isn't provable. - \polls have suggested that it would have been enough to alter the vote - even if 5-10% of those that voted leave did it as a protest and either didnt vote, or voted the other way would see a different result. - or as I'd put it "If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle" I've seen Governments at General Elections formed with smaller majorities but never a re vote cos we didn't like the result

I wouldn't have wanted a 2nd vote, just like many Remainers who don't because they rely on democracy. Also, lies WERE told by both sides - Easy to say that now, and yes lies were told by both sides, but the big one was by the leavers. - simply not true, "project fear" was every much a pack of lies as any told by brexiteers and if we voted again the two sides would lie again.

Lets boil it down to one thing - how is a second vote undemocratic?

I know it wasnt via referendum but if "we" hadnt changed our mind in 1940, we may still have been very much a forced part of Europe, even now!!!!

 

[USER1999]

Lets boil it down to one thing - how is a second vote undemocratic?

Because the result of the first vote has not been acted upon?

 

[Liverbirdie]

Because the result of the first vote has not been acted upon?

It still doesnt make a 2nd vote undemocratic, especially if its a one-way journey.

 

[bobmac]

Lets boil it down to one thing - how is a second vote undemocratic?

If you wanted to buy a new car and the choice was BMW or MERC, your family have a vote. They all vote BMW but you want the Merc.
Do you buy the BMW or wait a few months and have another vote?