Interesting video about Brexit

Forums › Off topic › Interesting video about Brexit

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582014 28-Jun-2016 14:14

Satch:

Geektastic:

Satch:

PhantomNVD: "Let's find our NHS instead"

Is neither a promise, or incorrect, it's an OPTION in what else to do with the money, and most arguments about the total sum revolve around defraying a part of it against the 'income' they receive for various things in their country too.

Let's be a bit sensible here. The slogan on the bus implies that the 350m would possibly be put into NHS instead. It doesn't guarantee it but it implies it, and a lot of voters I'm sure would have taken that as something firmly on the table.

It is on the table.

On the table means "possible depending on prevailing circumstances at the time" not "here's the cash!"

Again this is twisting the situation to fit your views. I twisted it the other way when Farage denied post result that diverting the money to NHS was a mistake made by other leave campaigners. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-nigel-farage-nhs-350-million-pounds-live-health-service-u-turn-a7102831.html. You have to realise that things raised during a campaign like this will be taken as pledges if one votes for a certain outcome. Surely we are all sensible enough to agree on that?

IME politicians are not backward in presenting 'pledges' as so marked, clearly and obviously. Thus I tend to the view that anything else is merely electioneering and all is fair in love and war, as it were.

Most assuredly, I would not be so naive as to believe that something plastered on a bus constituted an unbreakable campaign pledge unless it said "Vote for us - we pledge to do X"

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582016 28-Jun-2016 14:18

Satch:

SJB:

I agree 100%. Let's come back in 10 years and discuss who called it correctly.

Why? Is this a competition? We are talking about people's livelihoods at stake here.

SJB:

But more importantly than brexit - England lost 2-1 to Iceland. Now that is a disaster!

Don't England normally bomb out of any soccer tournament they enter? Where is the disaster in this?

Oh, it was football.

Well, ask the Australians - England are obviously concentrating their efforts on another ball game at the moment.

Satch

1985 posts

Uber Geek

#1582021 28-Jun-2016 14:23

Geektastic:

Satch:

Geektastic:

Satch:

PhantomNVD: "Let's find our NHS instead"

Is neither a promise, or incorrect, it's an OPTION in what else to do with the money, and most arguments about the total sum revolve around defraying a part of it against the 'income' they receive for various things in their country too.

Let's be a bit sensible here. The slogan on the bus implies that the 350m would possibly be put into NHS instead. It doesn't guarantee it but it implies it, and a lot of voters I'm sure would have taken that as something firmly on the table.

It is on the table.

On the table means "possible depending on prevailing circumstances at the time" not "here's the cash!"

Again this is twisting the situation to fit your views. I twisted it the other way when Farage denied post result that diverting the money to NHS was a mistake made by other leave campaigners. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-nigel-farage-nhs-350-million-pounds-live-health-service-u-turn-a7102831.html. You have to realise that things raised during a campaign like this will be taken as pledges if one votes for a certain outcome. Surely we are all sensible enough to agree on that?

IME politicians are not backward in presenting 'pledges' as so marked, clearly and obviously. Thus I tend to the view that anything else is merely electioneering and all is fair in love and war, as it were.

Most assuredly, I would not be so naive as to believe that something plastered on a bus constituted an unbreakable campaign pledge unless it said "Vote for us - we pledge to do X"

So in your opinion what was/were the reasons to leave?? To stop the influx of immigrants? Surely that could have been done in a much less destructive way? "Let's get the sledgehammer out to make scrambled eggs".

Satch

1985 posts

Uber Geek

#1582023 28-Jun-2016 14:24

Geektastic:

Oh, it was football.

Well, ask the Australians - England are obviously concentrating their efforts on another ball game at the moment.

Sorry but the sport is called soccer in this country. We will have a referendum to get rid of all those people who do not use NZ English ;-)

mattwnz

20157 posts

Uber Geek

#1582061 28-Jun-2016 15:02

Satch:

Geektastic:

Oh, it was football.

Well, ask the Australians - England are obviously concentrating their efforts on another ball game at the moment.

Sorry but the sport is called soccer in this country. We will have a referendum to get rid of all those people who do not use NZ English ;-)

Not anymore. It is now football. Eg Google NZ soccer, and the NZ Football website will be the first link.

UHD

655 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1582064 28-Jun-2016 15:04

Satch:

Geektastic:

Oh, it was football.

Well, ask the Australians - England are obviously concentrating their efforts on another ball game at the moment.

Sorry but the sport is called soccer in this country. We will have a referendum to get rid of all those people who do not use NZ English ;-)

Actually, we use the term football in New Zealand. The governing body being the prime example. http://www.nzfootball.co.nz/about-new-zealand-football/ but also all major news outlets refer to the sport as football.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582066 28-Jun-2016 15:05

Satch:

Geektastic:

Satch:

Geektastic:

Satch:

PhantomNVD: "Let's find our NHS instead"

Is neither a promise, or incorrect, it's an OPTION in what else to do with the money, and most arguments about the total sum revolve around defraying a part of it against the 'income' they receive for various things in their country too.

Let's be a bit sensible here. The slogan on the bus implies that the 350m would possibly be put into NHS instead. It doesn't guarantee it but it implies it, and a lot of voters I'm sure would have taken that as something firmly on the table.

It is on the table.

On the table means "possible depending on prevailing circumstances at the time" not "here's the cash!"

Again this is twisting the situation to fit your views. I twisted it the other way when Farage denied post result that diverting the money to NHS was a mistake made by other leave campaigners. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-referendum-nigel-farage-nhs-350-million-pounds-live-health-service-u-turn-a7102831.html. You have to realise that things raised during a campaign like this will be taken as pledges if one votes for a certain outcome. Surely we are all sensible enough to agree on that?

IME politicians are not backward in presenting 'pledges' as so marked, clearly and obviously. Thus I tend to the view that anything else is merely electioneering and all is fair in love and war, as it were.

Most assuredly, I would not be so naive as to believe that something plastered on a bus constituted an unbreakable campaign pledge unless it said "Vote for us - we pledge to do X"

So in your opinion what was/were the reasons to leave?? To stop the influx of immigrants? Surely that could have been done in a much less destructive way? "Let's get the sledgehammer out to make scrambled eggs".

No, it could not. It is considered a fundamental rule in the EU that anyone with EU citizenship can move to any state within the EU. That rule is inviolate.

Additionally inviolate is the rule that says any EU citizen from another country must be given the same access to welfare etc as a native of the state in which they are residing.

This leads to situations where, for example, Romanians (a very poor nation) can move to Britain and get free healthcare, free benefits etc etc despite never having paid a bean in tax in the UK. This causes, as you may imagine, friction.

Now, it would be correct to suggest that had the EU collectively realised that the whole idea was really a bit silly and impractical on several levels, and decided to change it, that may have averted the present position. However, as an opinion piece in the Daily Telegraph says today

"You simply cannot justify why the Danes or the Dutch or the British should have to provide unlimited welfare rights to Syrians who were given EU passports not by their own governments but by the Germans."

The blame for the current situation - if blame is the right word - lies as much with the commissariat of the EU as it does with the voters of the UK. A little common sense and flexibility over the last 25 years would have ensured that this never eventuated the way it has.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582067 28-Jun-2016 15:06

Geektastic:

That does not say that all 350 million should go to the NHS.

Of course not *facepalm*

Obviously you are not aware of the speeches given by Boris and the team prior to this.

I think further discussions between me and you are futile. You mostly spout your personal opinions rather than have the ability to put facts into the discussion.

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582074 28-Jun-2016 15:19

Geektastic:

The younger generation have no experience on which to base their decisions

Right, aren't you young once or are you born old and get younger everyday (Benjamin Button style)? At some point people do need to make decisions. One thing I like about politicians in NZ, most of them are young and only a few are from the older generation.

Slavery/segregation was an accepted custom in the past - younger generation did not experience that. It does not mean they are worse off.

no money in the system

Whatever that means?

and usually worse educations due to modern reduction of standards.

Back then, genetics, molecular are just something that you dream in sci fi novels. The younger generation learn this at school and therefore they have different knowledge to what is thought the past.

I would not be so arrogant and claim that the past has better standards given the knowledge and tools available are different between generations.

Also, nothing stopped them getting their noses out of social media or their X Boxes and going to vote except their own laziness and apathy.

Do you have kids? That is just a lazy statement.

shk292

2855 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1582091 28-Jun-2016 15:39

Satch:

So in your opinion what was/were the reasons to leave?? To stop the influx of immigrants? Surely that could have been done in a much less destructive way? "Let's get the sledgehammer out to make scrambled eggs".

How? It's a fundamental rule of the EU. How would you propose controlling immigration if EU forbids it?

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1582096 28-Jun-2016 15:44

Satch:

Sorry but the sport is called soccer in this country. We will have a referendum to get rid of all those people who do not use NZ English ;-)

If you win that referendum I'd demand a rerun or even more likely to succeed, start an online petition against the result.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29763 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582222 28-Jun-2016 18:09

Satch:

I have been following this thread with interest. It has become very apparent that the pro leavers will find any material in the media or on social networking to prove their point. And the pro remain people will do the opposite. This is likely to go on in circles.

I was/am pro remain because two thirds of my household income comes from GBP. I believed the experts who said a leave vote would severely impact the UK and world economies. I believe that the vote to leave is a vote for the UK to start again from scratch in terms of building a new economy for themselves (trade agreements and the like). I personally do not believe that this is the best option especially since the world has been climbing its way out of the last recession, and really didn't need a new event to risk falling into another. And I've seen two thirds of my household income drop by 10% so far in only a few days (and that doesn't take into account any of the falls prior to the vote based on close polls), and can see it dropping further over the coming months/years because the UK will effectively need to start over and no one really knows how that is going to play out.

Is this a selfish view? Maybe. But anyone who wishes for an outcome that will benefit them could be labelled the same. And isn't that how decisions on voting work?

My view is that the leave decision, albeit it by a slim majority (making it even hard for the "losers" to swallow) is a big backwards step which has no guarantee whatsoever of building a better future.

Don't worry, if the British didn't stuff up world peace - I mean economy, the Americans would have done it come November :)

Batman

Mad Scientist
29763 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582223 28-Jun-2016 18:10

SJB:

Satch:

Why? Is this a competition? We are talking about people's livelihoods at stake here.

Don't England normally bomb out of any soccer tournament they enter? Where is the disaster in this?

I'm not suggesting it's a competition, just that nobody knows for sure at this moment in time what the economic result is going to be long term.

Yes England do bomb every time but not normally quite as badly. And as an Arsenal supporter I'm used to coming 2nd or 3rd or 4th or.......

Or lose to Iceland ... in fact I need to learn Icelandic for the commentary ...

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1582306 28-Jun-2016 19:59

Satch:

PhantomNVD: "Let's find our NHS instead"

Is neither a promise, or incorrect, it's an OPTION in what else to do with the money, and most arguments about the total sum revolve around defraying a part of it against the 'income' they receive for various things in their country too.

Let's be a bit sensible here. The slogan on the bus implies that the 350m would possibly be put into NHS instead. It doesn't guarantee it but it implies it, and a lot of voters I'm sure would have taken that as something firmly on the table.

True, it implies funds will be available. All, most or some. The implication is a reasonable amount.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1582311 28-Jun-2016 20:05

There's now a real possibility of a vote by the public on a "new deal" with the EU by way of a second referendum, or a dissolution and new election. Rumours of this have seen the GBP rise and financial markets recover.

Hope it's true. Bigots won't like it. Would be good to see an attempt at true democracy instead of that knee-jerk post-factual pseudo-democratic trash UK media led BS referendum.

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38