Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
inbetween said:
What about foreign companies based here like Goldman Sachs who helped to fund the remain campaign?

If there can be no foreign intervention, no money, no-one is allowed to give their opinion without fear of being prosecuted for telling lies etc... We may as well just ban free speech.

I prefer to trust that when someone steps in the polling booth they should be able to vote however they please.

By the way, there are people on here who believe every word an economist says on Brexit. However, when it comes to their warnings on Jeremy Corbyn, it's all suddenly fake news.
Click to expand...
Maybe anyone who does contribute to campaign should be obliged to declare it like Soros did. I'm pretty sure the Russian government didn't.

I'm finding it odd that people are defending the rights of foreign governments to clandestinely interfere in our democracy just because it helped their side of the argument.
 
west didsblue said:
Maybe anyone who does contribute to campaign should be obliged to declare it like Soros did. I'm pretty sure the Russian government didn't.

I'm finding it odd that people are defending the rights of foreign governments to clandestinely interfere in our democracy just because it helped their side of the argument.
Click to expand...

That is not fair and you know it.

I’m against all interference and my posts have made that clear.

My issue is those who only seem to take issue with the opposition and frankly because they lost.
 
lancs blue said:
As a remain voter I would hope that's the case but I suspect a tweaked version of the WA will eventually get through, though certainly not by 31st October.
Click to expand...

It will never get through because of the sheer tribalism of our politics.
 
lancs blue said:
As a remain voter I would hope that's the case but I suspect a tweaked version of the WA will eventually get through, though certainly not by 31st October.
Click to expand...

The problem with the WA is that the Brexit camp have demonised it as the biggest sellout since the Treaty of Versailles, yet a tweak here and a dab of lipstick there and it’s now a victory for Brexit? Tough sell and if Farage doesn’t buy it (he won’t) then no one is buying it.

You’re right about 31st Oct. Nothing is getting done by then.
 
blueinsa said:
That is not fair and you know it.

I’m against all interference and my posts have made that clear.

My issue is those who only seem to take issue with the opposition and frankly because they lost.
Click to expand...
My second paragraph was addressing inbetween's second sentence, not anything you said.
 
BobKowalski said:
The problem with the WA is that the Brexit camp have demonised it as the biggest sellout since the Treaty of Versailles, yet a tweak here and a dab of lipstick there and it’s now a victory for Brexit? Tough sell and if Farage doesn’t buy it (he won’t) then no one is buying it.

You’re right about 31st Oct. Nothing is getting done by then.
Click to expand...
Why would Farage buy it, or any other agreement? He'd be out of a job.
 
Pound Sterling been rising all day since announcement.

Hits best levels in a month against the Euro.

"The pound traded around its strongest level in a month against the euro on Wednesday, as more weak economic data from the shared currency area put Westminster’s political drama in the shade. As Boris Johnson, the leading Eurosceptic, prepared to take over as prime minister, sterling was on course for its biggest rally against the euro since May, strengthening by 0.6 per cent with £0.8915 required for a unit of the shared currency."

https://www.ft.com/content/d5261cb0-ae16-11e9-8030-530adfa879c2
 
Rascal said:
I don't believe it does. Remain was about the status quo, nobody promoted the vision of what you post, its an assumption driven by the anti -EU lobby.

I am on record here saying that I would have supported exactly that vision, but it was not an option on the ballot. I wish the option was there and that it was possible to be part of a Federal Europe with an elected President, EU armed forces, a powerful and accountable central bank with a singular economic policy. I see that as progress not regression. Remaining/status quo gives us none of that, it would still be a collection of sovereign states with a common goal rather than an integrated state with a common purpose. That's a nuanced difference between remain/status quo and what we could have with a more visionary approach.

I have not seen any argument that says a fully federal state would be a bad thing beyond taking away from British exceptionalism and the mythical view of national sovereignty. If self government was so important why is that the UK act of union proved so successful. We have four disparate and distinct nations sharing a currency, a central bank, armed forces, a common head of state and a singular economic policy. Instead we as a nation have become introspective and isolationist at a time when the rise of China and the re=emergence of Russia are threatening the world stage. A fully federal EU would lessen our reliance on the USA and the EU could become a bulwark between those emergent economies and those established superpowers.

Have you got a cogent argument why a fully federal EU (not the status quo/remain) would be a bad thing?
Click to expand...
Accept what you say, but some things are clear from your post, when you say:

"I have not seen any argument that says a fully federal state would be a bad thing...…."

"Have you got a cogent argument why a fully federal EU (not the status quo/remain) would be a bad thing?"

On holiday so not minded to spend time on a detailed reply -just want to acknowledge that you have been clear that for you the EU status quo is not sufficient. For you, a fully federal model is what you seek

I respect that - you are honest about it and you have the right to hold and support that view

Equally, those of us that do not wish to see the fully federal model have the right to hold and support our view.

At least you show tolerance for us holding our view and do not go off on rants that we do not have that right.

The only difference that we may have is that for me, whilst I agree that a Remain vote was indeed in the main a status quo vote, I have no doubt that the insidious and assiduous approach, methods and trajectory of the EU will ensure that the status quo of 2016-2019 is nothing but a very temporary status and that your ambition of full integration is the destination that we will not be able to depart from.
 
Last edited:
Rspca (international division) called to investigate a donkey missing a hind leg somewhere in the med. The glass eye incident is under investigation
 
blueinsa said:
You can only imagine the responses had it gone down all day.............
Click to expand...
Still not recovered from ww1, ww2, the detachment from the gold standard and the 70's devaluations. The diminishing strength of Stirling over the last 100 years broadly reflects the diminished significance of the UK during that time. It's possible to pick a arbitrary starting point along this line to try and prove any point you like. I take no more comfort from today's surge than I worry about the supposed plunge due to brexit.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
I asked exactly the same question a week or so ago without a response from our Brexit chums.
Click to expand...
At least this means some of you guys have moved on to supporting the case for a fully federated EU model

Other Remainers still cling to the seriously flawed argument that remaining in the EU will not lead to integration for the UK

That argument - opt outs, vetoes etc. is just so divorced from reality as to render those presenting it to be either intentionally prevaricating, deceiving themselves or simply ill-informed.

At least Rascal and yourself are moving the conversation on from that nonsense
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top