Brexit...

[Peter H]

This is scary and disturbing - http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-government-vote-animal-sentience-cant-feel-pain-eu-withdrawal-bill-anti-science-tory-mps-a8065161.html

[Romey 1878]

32 minutes ago, Peter H said:

This is scary and disturbing - http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-government-vote-animal-sentience-cant-feel-pain-eu-withdrawal-bill-anti-science-tory-mps-a8065161.html

Pissed me right off when I heard about it. Sums this government up though.

[Palfy]

Not at all surprised it must have something to do with profit before consciousness typical Tory trait.

[pete0]

On 23/11/2017 at 08:31, Peter H said:

This is scary and disturbing - http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-government-vote-animal-sentience-cant-feel-pain-eu-withdrawal-bill-anti-science-tory-mps-a8065161.html

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/205348

Make them talk it out again. 

The tories have already been named and shamed. You vote for them, they represent you. Yes, you too are a cunt. 

[Bailey]

On 11/22/2017 at 08:48, holystove said:

Being a member of the EU in no way restricts the UK to trade with everyone, it just extremely facilitates trade within the EU.  It also massivily helps the UK to trade outside of the EU.  There are only 6 countries (not important ones, Mauritania, North Korea, etc.) on the entire planet the EU has zero agreements with, because of Brexit that number will increase to 195 for the UK.  Sure, the UK will negotiate new agreements, but it will do so with a lot less leverage than it has now as a member of the EU.

No matter what the future relationship between the EU and the UK (at worst WTO), the UK will always trade primarily with the EU because of geography.

Brexit can't be pro trade, but in theory it can be pro immigration.  However I don't really think choosing that route would be a right interpretation of the Brexit vote. 

The very moment the UK enters into negotations with any other entity in the world, it will have to compromise.  Only North Korea does everything on its own terms.

The EU is not about continentals telling the UK what to do .. ?  Thanks to the (former) standing of the UK and its (former) soft power to influence and shape decisions taken at EU-level, a lot of people on the continent have had the feeling for decades it has been the other way around.

I wondered how long it would take you to chip in Please just allow me to say what I want without any factual basis... I am thinking about a job as a politician  

I would like to point out a couple of things about your reply:

1. I didnt say that being in the EU restricts trade. Controlling our own trade decisions does allow us to pick who and when and how we trade with and on what terms

2. We can be pro-trade. I didnt say that it would be a positive trading relationship, but we can still be pro-active traders (despite whether we are or not already with the EU). Its not like we are anti-trade (well I wouldn't put anything past our Govt), we will want (and need), very good trade relationships with every country out there.

3. We will have to compromise but there is also the potential that we can get better deals as well. Sure the EU is going to have better bargaining power than the UK on its own, but just because they are bigger, it doesnt mean that they can do better deals. For example we could have a better trade deal regarding financial or legal services with the USA, Canada, Australia and other English speaking countries (I think an EU think tank even said this), albeit we will also get worse deals in other areas.

4. Maybe the phrasing wasnt correct however I, maybe wrongly, dont see the US govt wanting to have to share decisions with any other country, let alone as many countries as there are in the UK. I can say that with near on certainty given the current US govt. Whether its the UK or not, all countries have to give and take in the EU.

As I have said before,  the theoretical possibility of the UK leaving the EU and the reality of it are far different things. I like to have control of my decisions, I like to be able to shape my own future. Theoretically that is what the UK can do, however, the reality is that we dont have a chance because its far too complicated. Its like tryign to get a divorce with 6 or 7 wives with 20 odd kids to pay for and then still want to control your own future. But dont worry, we arent leaving the EU.

On 11/22/2017 at 23:13, MikeO said:

Puts you in a tiny minority Rubes.

Brexit won due to ( I want to say  xenophobia but  it's too strong for people on here) misinformation. We are lucky to have Holystove to give us factual stuff.

Bailey, plainly an intelligent guy in many ways, is completely wrong on this (and has been schooled). If a guy like him can be fooled what chance the average man on the street?

Fuck you Mike, Im not completely wrong, Im just not right very much either!

[holystove]

12 hours ago, Bailey said:

I wondered how long it would take you to chip in  

[...]

But dont worry, we arent leaving the EU.

I'm on Toffeetalk daily to keep up with everything Everton, but can't help myself and always feel drawn to this thread  .. I guess it's like hafnia with Lukaku.   I wouldn't have replied if I didn't think it might help clarify something, or to put a different perspective on it though.

I seriously doubt the UK won't leave.  Even if the UK government changed its mind (which I don't really see happening), I don't think all the other member states would welcome the UK back (all of them have a veto). 

Also, it would be poisonous for the EU to keep a country on board whose population is pretty much split down the middle on whether or not they want to be in it.  I can only imagine more UKIPrs coming to Brussels .

[Peter H]

Ordered my christmas jumper today. 

[Chach]

16 hours ago, Bailey said:

Controlling our own trade decisions does allow us to pick who and when and how we trade with and on what terms

 

You don't get to pick terms, they are negotiated with the trading partner with both sides giving up what they need to in order to get access to the market they want access to.

You are not getting better deals than the EU bloc would get. End of.

[MikeO]

Of course we do, we're British! The rest of the World will do as they're told or they'll suffer the consequences.

[Matt]

5 hours ago, Chach said:

You don't get to pick terms, they are negotiated with the trading partner with both sides giving up what they need to in order to get access to the market they want access to.

You are not getting better deals than the EU bloc would get. End of.

Exactly. Anyone we try to enter into negotiations with will automatically be at an advantage because they know we need the trade plus can always leverage going to an EU member / elsewhere. 

So trade will suffer, immigration won’t change and the Tories will have free reign. How anyone can think this is a positive move is beyond me.  

[Matt]

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42161346

So that's what, 2-3 years worth of "£350m going to the NHS" going to the EU?

[Chach]

So, in summary.

[Louis]

Do people generally not know that (Republic of) Ireland is an independent country? I've seen several people refer to it as part of the UK.

[MikeO]

1 hour ago, Louis said:

Do people generally not know that (Republic of) Ireland is an independent country?

I assume so, it's pretty basic stuff.

[Palfy]

What a legacy the Brexiteers have left our children and grandchildren massive debts a shrinking economy and a status quo on the issue of boarders and immigration, who in the right minds would pay someone more money to receive a worse deal than they were already getting Brexit voters that's who. Not the best idea in the world personally I think the financial implications haven't been felt yet and thousands of jobs will be lost inflation will far out strip wages and families will lose the roof over their heads, and I pray that that doesn't happen to any remain voters because that would be an injustice, hopefully all the misfortune will fall at feet of the Brexiteers so they can reflect on their decision for years to come now that would be poetic justice.

[holystove]

To be fair, had the UK voted to Remain, the same amount of money would have to be paid into the EU budget.  So it's not really true that it could have been spent on the NHS.

Ofcourse, now the money is being paid without the economic benefits of being part of the largest single market in the world..

 

[Chach]

7 hours ago, Palfy said:

What a legacy the Brexiteers have left our children and grandchildren massive debts a shrinking economy and a status quo on the issue of boarders and immigration, who in the right minds would pay someone more money to receive a worse deal than they were already getting Brexit voters that's who. Not the best idea in the world personally I think the financial implications haven't been felt yet and thousands of jobs will be lost inflation will far out strip wages and families will lose the roof over their heads, and I pray that that doesn't happen to any remain voters because that would be an injustice, hopefully all the misfortune will fall at feet of the Brexiteers so they can reflect on their decision for years to come now that would be poetic justice.

Yeah but MAGA,

Make Albion Great Again.

[holystove]

https://advisa.se/en/research/brexit-bus/

[MikeO]

37 minutes ago, holystove said:

https://advisa.se/en/research/brexit-bus/

Completed at third attempt in 141 seconds.

[Louis]

BBC are reporting that "UK is poised to accept that there can't be "regulatory divergence" between the North and South of Ireland after we leave the EU."

DUP politicians are very unhappy with that.

[Quinn31]

Can anyone explain why the Lib Dems can't find a better foothold in British politics? Seems like a lot of their leaders seem reasonable, though it would appear the party doesn't have one consistent economic message (most important thing to voters), but rather the economic views of the party vary across its members much moreso than Labour and the Tories. Other than that, the party doesn't seem to have too many knocks against it it would seem other than being largely gutless and being a party of technocrats and academics (The heart of the party appears to be London)

The tories seem like proper soulless, greedy bastards that want to completely gut all social programs in order to marginally cut taxes for the few very richest. Corbyn seems to be channeling Kruschev rather than JFK. 

[holystove]

5 hours ago, Louis said:

BBC are reporting that "UK is poised to accept that there can't be "regulatory divergence" between the North and South of Ireland after we leave the EU."

DUP politicians are very unhappy with that.

And DUP has now blown up the deal.   10 flat earthers are deciding the future of the UK and Europe.

 

[Romey 1878]

15 minutes ago, holystove said:

And DUP has now blown up the deal.   10 flat earthers are deciding the future of the UK and Europe.

 

You lie down with dogs and you’ll get up with fleas. 

[MikeO]

7 minutes ago, Quinn31 said:

Can anyone explain why the Lib Dems can't find a better foothold in British politics?

The simple reason is the voting system; having "first past the post" in every constituency means that the various incarnations of the "LIberal" parties means that for the whole of my lifetime at least the party in underrepresented in parliament in comparison to the share of the overall vote they get. Grabbing figures out of mid-air they might get 20% of the vote but only end up with 5% of MPs so little influence; proportional representation would solve this in an instant but the Tories and Labour will never agree to it because it'd be like turkeys voting for Christmas.

We did have a referendum on a (watered down) form of PR when they were in coalition but obviously the "big two" campaigned against it so it never had a chance. Some would say that our current system is more likely to give a stable government with an overall majority (which it is) but that might be, almost always is, with significantly less than 50% of the popular vote; they argue that coalitions are weaker. I disagree; I think if you have proper grown-up debate on policy taking different views into account you'll get better government than by one party imposing their dogma unopposed.

Finally Lib Dems aren't really "London centred"; from memory they do have a couple of constituencies they're strong in there (Bermondsey and Richmond) but they also have significant support in the south west (a small part of it from me) and Scotland.

[pete0]

26 minutes ago, Quinn31 said:

Can anyone explain why the Lib Dems can't find a better foothold in British politics?

They were building themselves in to a genuine choice but fucked it up by siding with the Tories. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/10833847/The-Tories-said-coalition-wouldnt-work-and-they-were-dead-right.html

[Quinn31]

11 minutes ago, MikeO said:

The simple reason is the voting system; having "first past the post" in every constituency means that the various incarnations of the "LIberal" parties means that for the whole of my lifetime at least the party in underrepresented in parliament in comparison to the share of the overall vote they get. Grabbing figures out of mid-air they might get 20% of the vote but only end up with 5% of MPs so little influence; proportional representation would solve this in an instant but the Tories and Labour will never agree to it because it'd be like turkeys voting for Christmas.

We did have a referendum on a (watered down) form of PR when they were in coalition but obviously the "big two" campaigned against it so it never had a chance. Some would say that our current system is more likely to give a stable government with an overall majority (which it is) but that might be, almost always is, with significantly less than 50% of the popular vote; they argue that coalitions are weaker. I disagree; I think if you have proper grown-up debate on policy taking different views into account you'll get better government than by one party imposing their dogma unopposed.

Finally Lib Dems aren't really "London centred"; from memory they do have a couple of constituencies they're strong in there (Bermondsey and Richmond) but they also have significant support in the south west (a small part of it from me) and Scotland.

Winner take all/first past the post systems are such an affront to democracy. 

Oh well, you're doing better than us. We had a celebrity literally hijack a political party and use it to hold the entire western world order hostage just to get attention and boost his hotel business.

[MikeO]

3 minutes ago, pete0 said:

They were building themselves in to a genuine choice but fucked it up by siding with the Tories.

I'd still argue that they had little choice and were effective in limiting the worst excesses of the Tories while they were in coalition; you just need to look at what's happened since to get proof of that. It cost them hugely (they probably knew it was going to) but it was the right thing to do; they were vilified for going back on their manifesto when, as a minority coalition partner, they never had a cat in hell's chance of implementing it.

[holystove]

45 minutes ago, MikeO said:

I'd still argue that they had little choice and were effective in limiting the worst excesses of the Tories while they were in coalition; you just need to look at what's happened since to get proof of that. It cost them hugely (they probably knew it was going to) but it was the right thing to do; they were vilified for going back on their manifesto when, as a minority coalition partner, they never had a cat in hell's chance of implementing it.

Was there talk of other options instead of Tory-LibDem coalition in 2010?

[MikeO]

40 minutes ago, holystove said:

Was there talk of other options instead of Tory-LibDem coalition in 2010?

Lab/Lib coalition would've had 315 seats against Tories 306 (the DUP's 8 wouldn't made it an overall majority of one so very dicey). As the biggest party Tories had first go at trying to form a government; in my opinion if the LibDems hadn't come to agreement with them chaos would've ensued, a bit like now.

[rubecula]

Problem is people do not trust the Libs any more the the Lab or Tory parties.  I wish we had politicians we could trust but as we can't, we must make do with what we have.