Brexit, for once some facts.

[oldgroaner]

the 'middle classes': polite term for taxpayers.
Southend people are not rich and yet, they vote conservatives times and times again.

"Middle Class" is simply a term to describe those who have the conceit to imagine the term "Working Class" is derogatory.
They are inclined to be extremely sensitive to being manipulated if the strings that support this conceit are twitched, hence despite it being obviously stupid to do so, Vote Tory while disengaging the brain.

 

[Woosh]

one has to worry about the mental state of the electorate. they also buy lies about immigration, the nhs and almost everything else on a regular basis. from sneering, blatant liars like reese mog. perceived self interest (as with immigration) and all sorts of jingoism no doubt comes into it. im not sure what will change that, I'm watching with interest as brexit goes pear shaped to see if anything changes.

I watch regularly QT on Thursdays. It seems to me that the electorate prefers panelists who present simple, straightforward arguments.
If remainers seem to lose on typical questions such as 'we have voted, why can't we just leave?' it's usually because remainers and soft brexiters cannot present their arguments in a straightforward way.

 

[mountainsport]

Let it be never then!
We should be in there having some control over the process rather than fleeing like a buch of Cowards.

What the heck have we got to gain by leaving a good thing for a far worse one, just to make some of the Elite freer to swindle and abuse the rest of us?
And I might add antagonise former friends and partners into being resoluely opposed to us?
Only a complete lunatic does that, and we are.
We are making the biggest Strategic error in our long and sordid History, we fought for hundreds of years against hegemony in Europe, and at the same time to dominate it.
Now we have scored an own Goal on both counts.

1. We have ensured Europe will indeed form a Militarily Powerful Superstate
2. It will dominate us rather than us it.

Stupidity.

oldgroaner, I like that powerful word you had mentioned, "ELITE" playing hide and seek is when the seeker realises that they are getting warmer and warmer until that specific point from what was hidden then suddenly to the point of being found.


MS.

 

[flecc]

I watch regularly QT on Thursdays. It seems to me that the electorate prefers panelists who present simple, straightforward arguments.

For which read simplistic. The subject is so complex it cannot begin to be covered in simple terms for the electorate.

Which is why they should never have been allowed to vote on something they had no hope of adequately understanding.
.

 

[flecc]

"Middle Class" is simply a term to describe those who have the conceit to imagine the term "Working Class" is derogatory.

Some try to avoid that by terming themselves "lower middle class".

Of course Ted Heath is partly to blame for the middle class pretensions. Recognising how much society had changed he gave his famous Selsdon conference speech about "Selsdon Man", as opposed to the "Man on the Clapham Omnibus" of political history.

He was right of course, there was a big difference between Selsdon man who wore a suit to commute to his city office job, often in a management role, and the overalled Clapham man going to his manual job. That difference reflected in their social lives too, pub or cocktail evening, curry house or Michelin starred restaurant. Council house or owned home.

Trouble is everyone who had one of those "upper" characteristics latched on and thought of themselves as middle class, and Thatcher selling them their council house just reinforced that.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

From the Mirror
"
David Davis accused of 'contempt for parliament' after saying MPs may not vote on Brexit deal until AFTER we leave the EU
He's been accused of having "contempt for parliament" in a row over the Brexit vote.

It seems more and more the case that the country has been taken over by Gangsters who do anything they like.
Hang on there! this is the latest "Truth" from the independent
"
David Davis in climbdown as he says ministers 'expect and intend' MPs to vote on any Brexit deal before Britain leaves the EU"

The truth isn't out there, is it?

 

[Danidl]

I watch regularly QT on Thursdays. It seems to me that the electorate prefers panelists who present simple, straightforward arguments.
If remainers seem to lose on typical questions such as 'we have voted, why can't we just leave?' it's usually because remainers and soft brexiters cannot present their arguments in a straightforward way.

The answer is equally straight forward. "You can, but there's a two year waiting que, before getting out the door."
Then one pauses for 1 second and says" but....if you do that you lose all the benefits, all the goodwill and are seen as a rogue state., Someone who welches on agreements" .. and say no more.

 

[Woosh]

The answer is equally straight forward. "You can, but there's a two year waiting que, before getting out the door."
Then one pauses for 1 second and says" but....if you do that you lose all the benefits, all the goodwill and are seen as a rogue state., Someone who welches on agreements" .. and say no more.

I can't see the majority would use terms like benefits and goodwill to characterise our relationship with the EU, more like a corrupt administration. The vast majority sees the EU as a trading zone. As for the rest, the standard reply is, we were OK before we joined, we'll be OK after we leave.

 

[oldtom]

As for the rest, the standard reply is, we were OK before we joined, we'll be OK after we leave.

I suggest you speak solely for yourself as you have no mandate to speak on behalf of others that I know of.

A 'Brexit' fact is that the UK was most certainly not ok pre-1973 and will even more certainly not be ok if we secede from the union.

Tom

 

[Danidl]

I can't see the majority would use terms like benefits and goodwill to characterise our relationship with the EU, more like a corrupt administration. The vast majority sees the EU as a trading zone. As for the rest, the standard reply is, we were OK before we joined, we'll be OK after we leave.

Your question was as to how a remainer would or should respond and that is what I provided. There are enough hooks here for the Brexit supporter to ask questions about.

Now I cannot accept such vague terms as "majority " , or" vast majority ", when referring to the British people in this context. If you were to qualify it as the majority or vast majority of the MPs or Lords , then I must accept it. On the two occasions when the British people had an opportunity to express opinions, the 48:52 split and the GE election were basically indeterminate. On the other hand the HoC and the HoL voting results were definitive.

As to your OK statement, a remainers response would be .. Really when?, and what's gives you that confidence?
I suspect they will then harken back to to the glorious days of Dunkirk, when they stood alone, .. ignoring southern Africa, India, tranches of the middle East, and south America, and ANZAC and Canada...

 

[oldtom]

This little infographic is a very close approximation of how we have failed in the UK to make progress in an ever-changing world:




I disagree, however, with the absence of the royal family from the 'now' side of the pyramid. They are always there, continuing to breed among themselves, perpetuating their ghastly, eternal benefit fraud to the detriment of the common people.

Tom

 

[flecc]

As for the rest, the standard reply is, we were OK before we joined, we'll be OK after we leave.

No we were emphatically not ok before we joined!

That's the Brexiters problem, all too often being blissfully unaware of our serious decline over the decades before joining.

The myth that annoys me is that it's the older people who support Brexit, That's rubbish as this thread's older contributors show only too well. We are Remainers because we know how bad things were getting before we joined the EU and how much better it's become since.
.

 

[Woosh]

Now I cannot accept such vague terms as "majority " , or" vast majority ", when referring to the British people in this context.

the context is the Question Time selected audience which is supposed to represent the spectrum of UK opinion. Brexit questions are usually asked by the audience.
I don't know how many posters on here watch QT, I report what I see on that program.

 

[Woosh]

No we were emphatically not ok before we joined!


.

I know that. The point I try to make is if remainers want to win the argument, they need to adopt Mr Trump's way to express his politics. Otherwise, they just talk to themselves.

 

[flecc]

I know that. The point I try to make is if remainers want to win the argument, they need to adopt Mr Trump's way to express his politics. Otherwise, they just talk to themselves.

I accept the point you're making, but it really goes against the grain to do that, especially since remaining is no longer a realistic prospect.

For a Remainer the two best options are, let the Brexiters wreck the country and then say "I told you so", or emigrate.
.

 

[oldgroaner]

I can't see the majority would use terms like benefits and goodwill to characterise our relationship with the EU, more like a corrupt administration.

Which rather proves the point that they have been very effectively conned into attributing faults to the EU that properly belong at the door of the Conservative Party.

If ever there was a Corrupt organisation that is the supreme example, and yet the British public falls for their lies every time.

The Another Angry Voice Blogger made these points that illustrate the true situation
"One of the favourite tropes right-wingers love to rely on is the idea that they're proud patriots, and the left are a bunch of anti-British traitors.

Not only is wrapping yourself in the flag to score cheap political points an incredibly ugly thing in its own right, economically right-wing people don't have a leg to stand on either.

Just ask yourself why Britain's nuclear expertise now belongs to the French, meaning we need to bribe the French and Chinese into building Hinkley Point C instead of building our own energy infrastructure? (It was privatised in 1995 and bought out by the French government in 2008).

Ask yourself why 74% of UK rail franchises are operated by foreign governments? (Because the rail network was privatised in 1994 and has been gradually cannibalised by foreign state rail companies while the UK remains the only country that is blacklisted from bidding to run UK rail contracts!).

Ask yourself why the Chinese and Qatari governments own chunks of previously public assets like our water supply and National Grid? (Because they were privatised by the Tories and then sold on to foreign governments by corporate profiteers).

Ask yourself why the system of underground fuel supply pipelines that was built at the UK taxpayers' expense is now operated by the governments of Oman and the UAE? (Because in 2016 Theresa May decided to skip the corporate middleman and sell off these British public infrastructure direct to foreign governments).

Anyone who considers themselves a patriot and is moved by "let's take our country back" type rhetoric should be absolutely horrified that so much British public infrastructure is now being used as cash cow investments by foreign governments, and should be delighted with Jeremy Corbyn's plans to bring these chunks of vital public infrastructure back under British control.

But no. Somehow these self-styled patriots are willing to overlook the fact that the Tories have been systematically selling off our country just they'rve been bamboozled into mindlessly following the Brexit flag that Theresa May opportunistically nicked off the likes of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson when it suited her career to do so.

And all of this has happened while the Tory Party Blame the EU for everything including even no doubt the weather.

How are we going to take our country back when it doesn't belong to us anymore?
And where did all the money go from selling off our National Assets?

 

[oldgroaner]

I can't see the majority would use terms like benefits and goodwill to characterise our relationship with the EU, more like a corrupt administration. The vast majority sees the EU as a trading zone. As for the rest, the standard reply is, we were OK before we joined, we'll be OK after we leave.

Except that we were not in the Past Tense
And won't be in the Future Tense either.
That why we were desperate to join, and History will repeat itself, helped by the appalling incompetence of our Government.

 

[oldtom]

the context is the Question Time selected audience which is supposed to represent the spectrum of UK opinion.

If you believe that, you'll believe anything! It is certainly a selected audience but not in the way you seem to imagine.

Tom

 

[Woosh]

Which rather proves the point that they have been very effectively conned into attributing faults to the EU that properly belong at the door of the Conservative Party.

If ever there was a Corrupt organisation that is the supreme example, and yet the British public falls for their lies every time.

The Another Angry Voice Blogger made these points that illustrate the true situation
"One of the favourite tropes right-wingers love to rely on is the idea that they're proud patriots, and the left are a bunch of anti-British traitors.

Not only is wrapping yourself in the flag to score cheap political points an incredibly ugly thing in its own right, economically right-wing people don't have a leg to stand on either.

Just ask yourself why Britain's nuclear expertise now belongs to the French, meaning we need to bribe the French and Chinese into building Hinkley Point C instead of building our own energy infrastructure? (It was privatised in 1995 and bought out by the French government in 2008).

Ask yourself why 74% of UK rail franchises are operated by foreign governments? (Because the rail network was privatised in 1994 and has been gradually cannibalised by foreign state rail companies while the UK remains the only country that is blacklisted from bidding to run UK rail contracts!).

Ask yourself why the Chinese and Qatari governments own chunks of previously public assets like our water supply and National Grid? (Because they were privatised by the Tories and then sold on to foreign governments by corporate profiteers).

Ask yourself why the system of underground fuel supply pipelines that was built at the UK taxpayers' expense is now operated by the governments of Oman and the UAE? (Because in 2016 Theresa May decided to skip the corporate middleman and sell off these British public infrastructure direct to foreign governments).

Anyone who considers themselves a patriot and is moved by "let's take our country back" type rhetoric should be absolutely horrified that so much British public infrastructure is now being used as cash cow investments by foreign governments, and should be delighted with Jeremy Corbyn's plans to bring these chunks of vital public infrastructure back under British control.

But no. Somehow these self-styled patriots are willing to overlook the fact that the Tories have been systematically selling off our country just they'rve been bamboozled into mindlessly following the Brexit flag that Theresa May opportunistically nicked off the likes of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson when it suited her career to do so.

And all of this has happened while the Tory Party Blame the EU for everything including even no doubt the weather.

How are we going to take our country back when it doesn't belong to us anymore?
And where did all the money go from selling off our National Assets?

the sale of public assets, specially infractructural assets happened under both tory and labour administrations and entirely when we are inside the EU. One would say that the EU facilitated the sale of public assets. They support the sentiment of wanting to take the country back to where it was.

 

[Woosh]

I accept the point you're making, but it really goes against the grain to do that, especially since remaining is no longer a realistic prospect.

For a Remainer the two best options are, let the Brexiters wreck the country and then say "I told you so", or emigrate.
.

I want to see a soft brexit, the least evil of possible outcomes.
I you follow Sir Ivan Rogers testimony today at the HoC, his predictions were pretty accurate. The EU will not make soft brexit the easy choice.

http://www.cityam.com/274556/ivan-rogers-brexit-triggering-article-50-early-screwed-uk

The ambassador revealed that he strongly argued last autumn against rushing to trigger Article 50, saying the UK would be "screwed" on sequencing if it did so. He felt the EU would be able to dictate the chronology of discussions to such an extent that it could put a large financial demand on the table, and then refuse to move until the UK agrees to it.