Brexit/SISU (5 Viewers)

[NortonSkyBlue]

Quite a lot actually.
THE BANKS and financial institutions caused the CRASH in 2008. The neo liberal politicians like NEW LABOUR and the TORY feckwits
introduced austerity and corporate greed to try and pay for these financial irregularities. Hedge funds like Sisu with off shore tax breaks have benefited
from deregulation by these same spineless politicians. Austerity has therefore resulted in those with the least paying for the excesses of the rich.
Institutions like the FA and FL have loved corporate interference just like the government corrupted by the toxicity of a lobbying culture.
CCFC have suffered from this just like those on benefits and those without the means to pay for a house or an education.
UKIP and FARAGE told those people to blame the immigrants and NOT THE BANKS OR THE LOBBYING CULTURE and the tragedy is that most of them believed him.
ORWELL said the "ballot box is wasted on the English." and he was right.

Surely the will of the majority has to be listened to? the time to argue was before the referendum and the people who did not vote forfeited the right to complain IMO.
Those that voted to remain were shocked at the result, that much is clear, but the vote has taken place and the result should be upheld in Parliament.
If the MP's go against the BREXIT vote then expect serious repercussions from the leave voters.

 

---

[Captain Dart]

So you deny that there has been a 40% odd spike in race hate crimes against other nationalities since the referendum? Is there some kind of police and media conspiracy as well?

Why would people be making up stories that they have suffered abuse for being foreign? What about the Polish man murdered for speaking Polish? Was that another conspiracy? The story from Bournemouth was featured in the national media as well.

You're offensive attitude of denying and playing down racism makes me even more glad to be leaving. I'd be pretty ashamed myself if I were you.

I never said that, don't put words into my mouth. Incidents spiked & then dropped back to prior levels, pretty obvious really.
Check your facts rather than pump out nonsense that happens to match your politics.

I think it is the papers have the agenda, bigging up a nice abuse story sells papers.


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/.../hate-crime-1516-hosb1116.pdf

 

[martcov]

I never said that, don't put words into my mouth. Incidents spiked & then dropped back to prior levels, pretty obvious really.
Check your facts rather than pump out nonsense that happens to match your politics.

I think it is the papers have the agenda, bigging up a nice abuse story sells papers.


https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/.../hate-crime-1516-hosb1116.pdf
View attachment 5916

What is the average for the post Brexit period compared with the same time before? I think it is 41%, but get page not found when I click your link.

 

[Brylowes]

Whatever people think of the referendum result, I think everyone must now realise With
the mess it has caused and will continue to cause.
This was a decision to be made by central government, far too important and complex
To be put to the electorate, it's why we democratically elect governments.
Cameron was an absolute stiff as a PM and it's actually quite fitting that this debacle
Will be his everlasting legacy.

 

[albatross]

So 17,410,000 voters are WRONG!... OK.

I don't hold that view as it is certainly not clear exactly what they voted for. There is a broad church of belief as to what Brexit actually means. If I talk to 10 people who voted to leave then I'll probably get 10 different views on what Brexit means, some close enough to be reconciled with some compromise but the factions that are aligned to the soft vs hard brexit are unlikely to be reconciled.

Could you set out exactly what you believe you voted for what your Brexit looks like? It would be interesting to see if it matches all the others that voted to leave.

I believe in democracy so i don't see how an unelected prime minister can on her own rip up international treaties on an advisory ballot. The referendum has to be respected but via the appropriate process.

 

[Captain Dart]

What is the average for the post Brexit period compared with the same time before? I think it is 41%, but get page not found when I click your link.

Try https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2015-to-2016

 

[martcov]

Try https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2015-to-2016

I'm working- can you work it out? Thanks.

 

[Captain Dart]

I'm working- can you work it out? Thanks.

No, I'm busy enough thanks.

 

[Liquid Gold]

The only thing that will settle this is another referendum when we know exactly what brexit means.

 

[Captain Dart]

The only thing that will settle this is another referendum when we know exactly what brexit means.

Its already settled, tough shit,you ain't getting one.

 

[Liquid Gold]

Its already settled, tough shit,you ain't getting one.

If it was settled we wouldn't still be arguing. Do you have trouble understanding simple things?

 

[Captain Dart]

If it was settled we wouldn't still be arguing. Do you have trouble understanding simple things?

I'm not arguing, its you who are struggling with the concept of democracy.

 

[Liquid Gold]

I'm not arguing, its you who are struggling with the concept of democracy.

Because I believe people should be able to vote for 2 clear options over 1, stay in the eu or 2, the mystery box. The reason why this vote hasn't settled things is because it was so vague. If the government agreed terms of exit and then goes to the country with a binding referendum then nobody could disagree with the outcome. Is that undemocratic?

 

[Captain Dart]

Because I believe people should be able to vote for 2 clear options over 1, stay in the eu or 2, the mystery box. The reason why this vote hasn't settled things is because it was so vague. If the government agreed terms of exit and then goes to the country with a binding referendum then nobody could disagree with the outcome. Is that undemocratic?

You'll get a chance at the next election to vote Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott and proper fuck up the country.

 

[Liquid Gold]

You'll get a chance at the next election to vote Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott and proper fuck up the country.

Nice change of subject there pal, classic case of someone losing an argument.

 

[Captain Dart]

Nice change of subject there pal, classic case of someone losing an argument.

I won the argument, just waiting for May to deliver.

Will you vote for Labour next election, are you happy with their policies?

 

[Liquid Gold]

I won the argument, just waiting for May to deliver.

Will you vote for Labour next election, are you happy with their policies?

For a different thread, what we're talking about here is the legitimacy of a second referendum. You've made no convincing arguments against and your attempts to distract are making you look silly.

 

[martcov]

I'm not arguing, its you who are struggling with the concept of democracy.

Apropos democracy......, why is Queen Theresa bringing the royal prerogative out of the box to bypass parliament when everything is settled?

 

[chiefdave]

stay in the eu or 2, the mystery box. The reason why this vote hasn't settled things is because it was so vague. If the government agreed terms of exit and then goes to the country with a binding referendum

That was an issue for me. I was happy to be persuaded either way but past the headline '£350m a week for the NHS' and things that didn't stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny there was nothing. Just look how quickly the major players in the leave campaign all disappeared when they won. They couldn't get out of there fast enough.

We should have had something more along the lines of remain, remain if there is serious reform in the EU with x years (or another ref), leave but stay in single market with freedom of movement and making contributions (i.e.: the Norway model), or leave and go it completely alone.

I really think politics has reached a point where there's so much BS there needs to be some sort of fact checking system and repercussions for anyone who comes out with complete crap. Sort of the reverse of parliamentary privilege. A code of conduct I guess that you can't lie, mislead etc.

 

[Captain Dart]

Apropos democracy......, why is Queen Theresa bringing the royal prerogative out of the box to bypass parliament when everything is settled?

As I understand it only if the Supreme Court accept the Government argument. Also as I understand it the MPs will nod it through in quick time if the Courts rule against it.

The issue certainly highlights the need for the law to be crystal clear about what freedom of action the Government have after any future referendum.

 

[Captain Dart]

Nice change of subject there pal, classic case of someone losing an argument.

If you are looking for a misdirector you want to analyse Nick and Grendels techniques.

 

[chiefdave]

As I understand it only if the Supreme Court accept the Government argument. Also as I understand it the MPs will nod it through in quick time if the Courts rule against it.

The issue certainly highlights the need for the law to be crystal clear about what freedom of action the Government have after any future referendum.

The referendum act was very clear but for some reason people now seem to want to ignore what was agreed on. May should have got it straight in to parliament and a vote taken. The longer she hangs about the more likely that MPs will vote the other way and claim people have changed their minds.

 

[Nick]

If you are looking for a misdirector you want to analyse Nick and Grendels techniques.

Or you could say you and Jack have very similar techniques? Never did reply to my PMs

Any thoughts on the CCFC game? Nah probably not.

 

[Sick Boy]

The issue certainly highlights the need for the law to be crystal clear about what freedom of action the Government have after any future referendum.

Ideally there wouldn't be any at all, there's a reason why Germany banned them.

 

[martcov]

As I understand it only if the Supreme Court accept the Government argument. Also as I understand it the MPs will nod it through in quick time if the Courts rule against it.

The issue certainly highlights the need for the law to be crystal clear about what freedom of action the Government have after any future referendum.

It is. We fought a civil war to make parliament sovereign. Parliament won. Crystal clear.

The latest argument is that the government wants to carry out the will of the people and so bypass parliament using a royal prerogative.

The will of the people is carried out by it's elected parliament.

I do not see how a government can opt out of our system because it wants to.

If it gets away with it through the Supreme Court, I shall polish up my pitch fork and Farage better watch out for his arse....

 

[Captain Dart]

It is. We fought a civil war to make parliament sovereign. Parliament won. Crystal clear.

The latest argument is that the government wants to carry out the will of the people and so bypass parliament using a royal prerogative.

The will of the people is carried out by it's elected parliament.

I do not see how a government can opt out of our system because it wants to.

If it gets away with it through the Supreme Court, I shall polish up my pitch fork and Farage better watch out for his arse....

That war was a long time ago, it was about the supremacy of Parliament over the Monarch over not over a direct vote of the people.
In those days there wasn't even a universal vote, women certainly didn't count. Things change, you have to have a system in accord with the times.

 

[Sick Boy]

That war was a long time ago, it was about the supremacy of Parliament over the Monarch over not over a direct vote of the people.
In those days there wasn't even a universal vote, women certainly didn't count. Things change, you have to have a system in accord with the times.

That's no excuse for the government to act illegally; you can't pick and choose which laws apply based on your own agenda.

 

[dadgad]

You'll get a chance at the next election to vote Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott and proper fuck up the country.

The tragedy within the political bubble is that prior to Corbyn there was no voice, no alternative to the neo liberal mania for corporatism and austerity.

If corbyn had started five years ago we'd be a lot better off and wouldn't be blaming immigrants for problems that they're innocent of.

 

[Captain Dart]

That's no excuse for the government to act illegally; you can't pick and choose which laws apply based on your own agenda.

Nobody believes they will, if the courts rule against May she will have to proceed as they've interpreted the law.

 

[Captain Dart]

The tragedy within the political bubble is that prior to Corbyn there was no voice, no alternative to the neo liberal mania for corporatism and austerity.

If corbyn had started five years ago we'd be a lot better off and wouldn't be blaming immigrants for problems that they're innocent of.

You surely cannot believe what you've just said! 7 out of 10 labour held constituencies voted leave.
The problem isn't immigrants as such it is poor and declining prospects for unskilled people born in this country.
You can't brush something like that away by telling people what they should believe.

Changing behaviour patterns in society takes decades but it can be done, 5 years of Corbyn will do nothing, anyway the guy will never be Prime Minister.

 

[dadgad]

Cap Dart, The current Labour leadership is addressing the very things you lament.
The iniquity of low wages, the weaknesses of union recognition AND the unfairness of tuition of fees for those unable to afford to pay for an education and improve their prospects.
I repeat, the tragedy is that this ideological shift did not take place earlier.
'Unelectable' is a tag force fed to the brainwashed.

 

[Captain Dart]

Cap Dart, The current Labour leadership is addressing the very things you lament.
The iniquity of low wages, the weaknesses of union recognition AND the unfairness of tuition of fees for those unable to afford to pay for an education and improve their prospects.
I repeat, the tragedy is that this ideological shift did not take place earlier.
'Unelectable' is a tag force fed to the brainwashed.

Too much baggage going with the stuff I approve of. Labour under these people will break the economy and fritter money away.
I can't see myself ever voting Labour again. I want stability and steady improvements not revolutionary change.

Tuition fees, that is another policy disaster, not everybody is suited to academia, think on this.

Tuition is paid for by general taxation in Germany, although only 27% of young people gain higher education qualification there, whereas in the UK the comparable figure is 48%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuition_fees_in_the_United_Kingdom

Off beam, I heard an interesting thought expressed this morning that rented accommodation from buy to let landlords should include an element of property purchase for stable long term tenants. Its appalling that someone could rent for 5-10-20 years and end up with nothing to show for all that investment.

 

[ccfcway]

Off beam, I heard an interesting thought expressed this morning that rented accommodation from buy to let landlords should include an element of property purchase for stable long term tenants. Its appalling that someone could rent for 5-10-20 years and end up with nothing to show for all that investment.

maybe a bizarre question, but why not buy ?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Lack of a deposit. Paying high levels of rent with nothing to show for it. Sounds a bit like CCFC's arrangement with ACL.

 

[ccfcway]

Lack of a deposit. Paying high levels of rent with nothing to show for it. Sounds a bit like CCFC's arrangement with ACL.

surely renting for 5/10/20 years would enable someone to get a deposit together ?

maybe not if they started today, but certainly 20 years ago ?