EU referendum

[EalingBlue2]

Possibly but then at the very most that represents only 37% of the 65% of the entire country who turned out to the election. Whichever way you cut it that is only 10/11M of 70M or more people being represented on a future outside of the EU.

If you choose not to vote that's the price you pay. If the tories keep together and hold a majority then as much as I'd like it I don't see a reason for an election .

 

[IanBishopsHaircut]

They aren't facts. They never are in the Daily Express. They are always cherry picked to pander to the ex-BNP/EDL/Britain First crowd.

It's a running joke among reporters and the news media at how ridiculous the Daily Express is.

They only ever cover 3 things, immigrants, the E.U. and a cure for Alzheimers.

Have you actually even read it?

I absolutely guarantee that payouts to EU migrants has now topped 1 billion pound...the Handbrake Cameron has tried to instigate will fail...we need to take back control of our borders

This is not about Xenophobia...this is about pure economics...THIS WILL ONLY GET WORSE NOT BETTER

We CANNOT sustain this...any fool will realise this

 

[Leto]

Very good.

 

[SWP's back]

How can saying a stock market goes down when it has factually gone down be lying. You are denying the market went down on Brexit fears. Of course it can go back in a morning as it can double up in a morning ? havent seen you get so excited about anything for ages - as I said if you are concerned phone up the FT and the AFR and raise with them.

Saying it's gone down on Brexit fears is correct. Just as it always goes down before an election. Markets hate uncertainty, good or bad news they can deal with.

You said it would take ten years of being out of the EU to make that amount back when the two aren't remotely linked and also ignores the fact that a two point fall is absolutely fuck all.

You also said its wealth wiped off the nation when it's also untrue. That money was simply liquidised to cash and bonds.

This has annoyed me because it's something I happen to know a great deal about.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Possibly but then at the very most that represents only 37% of the 65% of the entire country who turned out to the election. Whichever way you cut it that is only 10/11M of 70M or more votes giving them a mandate to decide an entire future which the vast majority of voters have not even considered.

You are right, the whole system is bollocks. What we need is a system whereby a group of citizens vote for one of several people who stand, and select the one who will best represent the majority of those citizens. He would then join other such people who were elected by the citizens in their own area in a parliament where together they would make decisions that best reflect the interests of the people who vote for them and the country as a whole. I could go for that ....

 

[BigJoe#1]

He never will , it's not had any effect on here and unless you are broadcasting me to the good expats of Qatar I doubt it is going to change anyone. As I said before anyone that weak minded shouldn't be allowed a vote anyway.

You have been guilty in the past young SWP of misrepresenting things not least the fact I work for Goldman Sachs which was news to me .

In the case (I assume you mean here ) which so angered the Brexit mob, you should take that up with the editors of the Australian Financial Review and Financial Times websites they cited Brexit fears driving down the market not me . I hadn't even been aware of the poll that spooked the market till reading about the crash.

So your information sources in the media are fine, but those that disagree with you are tax dodging murdochites? Just so I'm clear about that, though it doesn't really do your arguement much good TBH!

 

[EalingBlue2]

So your information sources in the media are fine, but those that disagree with you are tax dodging murdochites? Just so I'm clear about that, though it doesn't really do your arguement much good TBH!

Some papers are newspapers some are political mouthpieces - I am not sure what the Australian financial reviews bias in this would be to be frank. I would apply the views of the guardian as biased though as with the mail or sun

 

[inbetween]

If you choose not to vote that's the price you pay. If the tories keep together and hold a majority then as much as I'd like it I don't see a reason for an election .

I'm not arguing against voting specifically, if people chose not to vote that is their problem but I am arguing that we have voted in a government on the premise of merely holding a referendum, any implementation afterwards is not up for discussion because no-one elected has considered it bar a minority of Brexiters.

I believe myself that leaving Europe is a constitutional change so large that we must have an election to decide upon a party best to lead us outside of Europe with a clear plan on how to do it. The Tories have not one single unified policy for Britain outside of Europe so how do they have a mandate to continue as the lead party, ESPECIALLY as they hold a position for us to stay in Europe. If they lose the referendum then the Tories have been effectively defeated on their own viewpoint so how can they continue with what becomes at stake.

As an example of how it isn't democratic - Nigel Farage wants to implement an Australian style points system, this is a guy who is not even an MP?! How does someone like him have a mandate to even talk about implementation. He of course can have an opinion but that opinion is swaying people to vote either way whilst it won't even be upto him anyway.

 

[M18CTID]

mine's the twat that told us the Turkish were all thieves and rapists and ten million of em would be here to do just that if we stay in the EU. Not only a twat but a fucking racist twat as well.

Big difference between some random nutjob spouting that than someone in government saying what they did though. Few would take notice of the former and dismiss it out of hand, where the latter is actually in a position to carry out his thinly-veiled threat and fuck over tens of millions of citizens, British or otherwise. That was the lowest of low blows and came across as a somewhat desperate throw of the dice by a beleaguered remain camp.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Saying it's gone down on Brexit fears is correct. Just as it always goes down before an election. Markets hate uncertainty, good or bad news they can deal with.

You said it would take ten years of being out of the EU to make that amount back when the two aren't remotely linked and also ignores the fact that a two point fall is absolutely fuck all.

You also said its wealth wiped off the nation when it's also untrue. That money was simply liquidised to cash and bonds.

This has annoyed me because it's something I happen to know a great deal about.

To be clear in case you haven't understood my comment I was not saying that it would take 10 years for a market to recover I was saying that if you lose 100m then at 9m a year it would take a decade to recover it.

That does assume firstly that the markets remain compressed and don't rebound and secondly that, the sellers money is not lost but those whose share values have dropped has been on paper at least and until and unless the shares rebound

If you know so much you know some of the scenarios that could come true and some of the risks being taken .