Post Brexit Discussion

[Richard W]

I hope that you are not suggesting that I am a UKIPer, though I do like the occasional kipper for breakfast.

I could not find a document per se, but there is a website that seems to broadly restate the point that RichardW is making.

No, I was thinking of your claim to be a superior googler. What you found is better than what I was looking for!

[secret.simon]

It turns out that I am not the only one pointing the finger at Juncker.

Brexit was Juncker's fault and he must go, says Czech foreign minister.

It is worth remembering that David Cameron was the only head of government to vote against Juncker's appointment as President of the Commission in 2014 and his current conduct is probably revenge for that. I would think triggering the exit of a country for voting against your appointment may be slight overkill, but I have observed emotional reactions have led to a lot of unnecessary turmoil in the world (one reason for me praising the dispassionate UK Home Office).

In any event, I believe that many nation-states of the EU will back the UK against the EU Commission.

[Wanderer]

Obie, the ignorance you are showing regarding Northern England is no less than the ignorance of a dearly beloved.

If you want proper EU beloved go to Germany, my better half worked there for year and her African friend at work was frequently to as 'Der Affe' - i.e. The Monkey.

That was Hamburg, in Berlin it was the opposite, very enlightened, goes to show you can't tar everyone with the same brush. (Bet that phrase is considered dearly beloved now).

[secret.simon]

I missed this paragraph on my first read of the article I linked to in my previous post, but I think this bodes very well for people using these forums.

EU officials said there was at least agreement among the 27 that Britain, in its current state of political crisis, was in no position to invoke Article 50 and trigger immediate exit negotiations. However, despite Mrs Merkel indicating there was no immediate hurry, diplomatic sources in Berlin and in Brussels stressed that this did not imply a “way out” for Britain, but for an orderly departure to begin, ideally before the end of the year.

If triggering Article 50 is postponed till the end of the year, that means it is highly likely that EU law, unadulterated with the UK-EU deal, continues to apply to the UK till the end of 2018. I imagine that that is very good news for many people whose applications and/or immigration journeys are in train.

Common sense and reason has prevailed over passion (on both sides).

[Obie]

Well in this campaign one has to face facts, vote remain has presented the facts, and put forward to the people the fact that the nation will face political and economic turmoil.

That is precisely what I am seeing today.

Vote leave was full of lies , incitement and hate. That is a fact.

Anyone who say vote leave is normal is ignorant or in a different planet from majority of decent people.

I have never shy from calling a spade a spade. I don't sugarcoat things. I say it as it is, I have done so several years before becoming a moderator, before some of you fine people even dreamt of joining the forum, nevermind the privilege of attaining reputable position of authority.

My views on beloved have always been expressed in no uncertain terms then, before becoming a moderator, and wanderer who knows me well will attest to that, and I have no intentions of suppressing them for the foreseeable future.

When you vilify lawful residence in the UK because of their ethnic background, communities who receives net benefit from EU with non existent eu citizen in their communities voting exit, people talking about getting their country back, when it was never taken in the first place, politicians talking about independence, when the UK was never a dependent nation, you see politician picking on Turkey, because it is a predominantly Muslim nation, then I wonder what definition can be given in those circumstances.

I don't call a person or a group dearly beloved unless they clearly are.

That whole issue is distraction, the key point for me is not vote leave.

My 2 concerns are Article 50, and the Scotland and Northern Ireland issue.

It is wrong to dwell on the Brexit vote. It is done. My concern is the turmoil in the world economy.

The economic impact on people's lives and the ongoing uncertainty of the market, are of more concern to me than the feeling of people who get upset because I called things by their real name.

Let's move on guys.

If a campaign or people act in manner consistent with beloved one has to call their actions dearly beloved.

When Trump called Mexican rapist and drug dealers I called him dearly beloved, when he said a Mexican judge cannot judge him fairly because he is Mexican, I call him dearly beloved. When he said ban Muslims I call him dearly beloved.

If vote leave leader vilify Turks, poles, refugee , I have an obligation to call them out. If some of their associates that voted for them are called dearly beloved, due to association, i don't think that is a big deal. It is like people voting for BNP and UKIP. Having regards to the policies of those parties, it goes without saying that their proper names has to be attribute to them.

When we are called sore losers, it did not even touch me, as I am very confident in my identity. I know I may not be perfect, but I am certainly not a loser.

If these people are not dearly beloved, there is no reason to take offense.

Now coming to the Article 50 issue again. Not invoking it, is like a former spouse refusing to sign a divorce paper when a marriage has irretrievably broken, and denying the other spouse an opportunity to get on with their lives.

What people are failing to understand is that I am not angry with UK leaving the EU. Far from it. I had always advocated many years back on this forum that UK should possibly be kicked out. That is all in the past now.

My anger and frustration is the ongoing political and economic turmoil. Look at the billions that has been wiped out of shares, the downgrading of uk credit rating, which will cause further misery to people , as cost of borrowing will go up.

Asian market are set to lose so much in their shares when market opens.

These are all important issues, which does not affect the UK only but also affects the world. Refusing to article 50, will just cause further world financial crisis.

If people are not troubled by this, or are more upset with a dearly beloved label that the problems in the world, then it is truly unfortunate.

Junker is working in the interest of the EU. Merkel has also alluded to the fact that UK must not stay for ever. It is not only France that complained, Belgium complained, Netherlands complained.

It is petty to suggest it is just a pay back against Cameron. This is people lives we are talking about. Their jobs, their livelihood dependent on this.

Farage and Johnson talks about EU breaking , it seems like this is their intention.

You want to leave, but now you don't wish to press the button to start the process.

[secret.simon]

This survey by Ipsos Mori is quite interesting. I draw your attention to slides 8 and 19 of the slideshow at the bottom of the page.

Slide 8 suggests that a majority of citizens in major EU countries (such as France and Italy) would also like a referendum, with significant minorities voting to leave.

Slide 19 suggests that most EU citizens expect the EU to either remain the same-i.e. not expand its powers (39%) or lose some powers (29%) by 2020.

Also, there is a historical similarity between Ireland's exit from the British Commonwealth (as then) and Brexit. In 1949, Ireland left the Commonwealth on the grounds that it did not wish to have the British monarch as sovereign. Yet, the next year, India asked for the same settlement (no British sovereign, but remain in the Commonwealth) and in 1950, it was established as a rule that Republics could be part of the Commonwealth. Despite rejecting the Commonwealth, Ireland received the same (and occasionally better) privileges in British law as other Commonwealth countries.

I believe that it will be a similar case with Brexit. The UK's exit (if it were to occur) will cause the EU to completely change the rules to what the UK wanted anyway. And the UK will get the benefit of those rules due to historic association.

It is often the rebels who are the trailblazers.

I have never shy from calling a spade a spade.

It has been suggested that members of my community prefer to call a spade a trowel. I personally prefer to call it an agricultural or horticultural implement (depending on size).

[Obie]

Also, there is a historical similarity between Ireland's exit from the British Commonwealth (as then) and Brexit. In 1949, Ireland left the Commonwealth on the grounds that it did not wish to have the British monarch as sovereign. Yet, the next year, India asked for the same settlement (no British sovereign, but remain in the Commonwealth) and in 1950, it was established as a rule that Republics could be part of the Commonwealth. Despite rejecting the Commonwealth, Ireland received the same (and occasionally better) privileges in British law as other Commonwealth countries.

I believe that it will be a similar case with Brexit. The UK's exit (if it were to occur) will cause the EU to completely change the rules to what the UK wanted anyway. And the UK will get the benefit of those rules due to historic association.

It is often the rebels who are the trailblazers.

The Position of Ireland was different from this. Ireland was a nation which was very damaged by the British Colonial master.

After the Irish Free State was Established up until 1949, Ireland was not truly independent. All Irish laws has to have royal ascent. It had to be approved by london. Their passport and every Irish life was controlled by England and Westminister. They had to break free.

This is a different cases. The irish case and what is happening now is not analogous.

[Wanderer]

Also, there is a historical similarity between Ireland's exit from the British Commonwealth (as then) and Brexit. In 1949, Ireland left the Commonwealth on the grounds that it did not wish to have the British monarch as sovereign. Yet, the next year, India asked for the same settlement (no British sovereign, but remain in the Commonwealth) and in 1950, it was established as a rule that Republics could be part of the Commonwealth. Despite rejecting the Commonwealth, Ireland received the same (and occasionally better) privileges in British law as other Commonwealth countries.

I believe that it will be a similar case with Brexit. The UK's exit (if it were to occur) will cause the EU to completely change the rules to what the UK wanted anyway. And the UK will get the benefit of those rules due to historic association.

It is often the rebels who are the trailblazers.

The Position of Ireland was different from this. Ireland was a nation which was very damaged by the British Colonial master.

After the Irish Free State was Established up until 1949, Ireland was not truly independent. All Irish laws has to have royal ascent. It had to be approved by london. Their passport and every Irish life was controlled by England and Westminister. They had to break free.

This is a different cases. The irish case and what is happening now is not analogous.

1937 surely?

[secret.simon]

The Position of Ireland was different from this. Ireland was a nation which was very damaged by the British Colonial master.

After the Irish Free State was Established up until 1949, Ireland was not truly independent. All Irish laws has to have royal ascent. It had to be approved by london. Their passport and every Irish life was controlled by England and Westminister. They had to break free.

This is a different cases. The irish case and what is happening now is not analogous.

Not that different.

Both Ireland-UK (1922-1938) and the UK-EU(1973-now) are cases of overlapping national and supra-national sovereignty clashes. One could argue that the EU is a post-colonial attempt at empire-building.

Wanderer is correct in that Royal Assent ceased to be required in Ireland in 1938, not 1949. Besides, Royal Assent is almost always automatically given by tradition.

As regards the passport, at the time, there were questions in international law about the status of Irish citizens. The efflux of time have resolved those questions.

[Amber]

It's obvious that the EU disaster is broken it's only time before the whole thing ends. I voted remain due to uncertainty, it appears that all the fear was just that fear. The best we can all do is move on. I appreciate that your work may be affected Obie as you rely on EU law. However, you might start to feel like the people up north who can't get jobs!

[Obie]

It's obvious that the EU disaster is broken it's only time before the whole thing ends. I voted remain due to uncertainty, it appears that all the fear was just that fear. The best we can all do is move on. I appreciate that your work may be affected Obie as you rely on EU law. However, you might start to feel like the people up north who can't get jobs!

I don't wish to discuss my job on a forum, but you are assured it was never dependent on UK's action. Never has been and never will be.

[Obie]

British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down. As the German equivalent of the CBI – the BDI – has very sensibly reminded us, there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market. Britain is and always will be a great European power, offering top-table opinions and giving leadership on everything from foreign policy to defence to counter-terrorism and intelligence-sharing – all the things we need to do together to make our world safer.

These people are unbelievable. They have taken the British People for Suckers.

Now that it is clear they cannot deliver, the are making it clear that what they promised cant be delivered.

[avjones]

I earn a significant portion of my living from EU law too, as I'm a barrister who does immigration law. I don't, however, think that everyone should have considered my career before voting!

I live in one of the areas with the highest percentage of "remain" voters, but I have family members in Kent who voted both ways. None are badly educated, ignorant, dearly beloved or northern. My sister and brother who voted out each have an undergraduate and master's degree, and my sister who voted in has a BSc. My brother also worked in South Korea for 5 years, and is currently doing a master's degree at SOAS, so is no inward-looking xenophobe. His girlfriend is Korean.

So how about we actually respect other people's opinions?

[Obie]

It has never been a problem, breaking down the different constituency of voters.

No one has suggested, that all the people who voted leave are uneducated or lovey. However it is a fact that a significant majority are. That is a fact , when you look into facts.

People who are less educated are likely to vote leave, it does not mean that all vote leave people are less educated, but the vast majority are. They majority of leave people are white working class, minimal educational attainment, concerned about immigration, knows little about EU and the single market. They have been told, even by the remain tories, long before referendum, for political gains, that all of UK's problems are caused by immigration and EU, and this people feel, that extricating themselves from the EU will solve all their problems.

The problem, it is my believe that nothing much will change, when the dust settles. Freemovement will continue, migrants will continue to come and work. Just look at Switzerland, since their people voted to cut migration, they still have not implemented it, and it is over 2 years now.

Please people, with the utmost respect, i implore you to desist from misrepresenting my position.

The demographic of Leave voters, are as described, but at least 30-40% of them are not.

In america for example, the majority of Donald Trump's supporters are white working class males, but there are some professionals that support Donald Trumps, and some highly educated. But the fact remains that the majority of his supporters are lovey who believe in the wall, and the mass deportation of Hispanic, and the banning of Muslims from entering America.

That is a fact of life, it is quite odd that we are arguing on this common sense matters, which the figures reveals.

[Wanderer]

Looks like BoJo is going for the 'Stay and Pay but Have no Say' model for the UK in Europe....

[avjones]

It has never been a problem, breaking down the different constituency of voters.

No one has suggested, that all the people who voted leave are uneducated or lovey. However it is a fact that a significant majority are. That is a fact , when you look into facts.

Don't be silly. That's not a "fact", that's your prejudice. The idea that you can say that a significant majority of many millions of people are uneducated or lovey "as a fact" says a lot more about you than them. Talking to a few leave voters or watching some selected vox pops on TV does not render you able to state that as "a fact".

[vinny]

I agree that "facts" may depend on (mis)interpretation. We should be very careful when attributing something as a "fact".

For example, would you consider banning dhmo?

[avjones]

Totally! It's an evil gateway drug, ruins lives!

ARGH!

[Obie]

I am not a prejudicial person at all. The figures indicates the assertions I made.

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/ho ... d-and-why/

Clearly people will not say I am lovey, one has to deduce from what the people said , to make this conclusion..

However it is fact that a significant number of people with secondary education only voted leave.

[Richard W]

Looks like BoJo is going for the 'Stay and Pay but Have no Say' model for the UK in Europe....

So he's conceded to 'Project Fear'.

Unless he's planning to declare an emergency over free movement, he has achieved bugger all. We will now have no say over EU laws that affect us, which is not what he was arguing for. Of course, by becoming a subject state rather than a member state, rants about having no say about laws imposed on us will become far more valid, which accords with UKIP's plan.

[Richard W]

For example, would you consider banning dhmo?

There is certainly a problem with physical dependence - it's impossible to break. On a large scale, it has to be carefully controlled.

[vinny]

For example, would you consider banning dhmo?

There is certainly a problem with physical dependence - it's impossible to break. On a large scale, it has to be carefully controlled.

Yes. I'm totally addicted to it and would get withdrawal symptoms if deprived of it. Cannot live without it.

[secret.simon]

For example, would you consider banning dhmo?

There is certainly a problem with physical dependence - it's impossible to break. On a large scale, it has to be carefully controlled.

Yes. I'm totally addicted to it and would get withdrawal symptoms if deprived of it. Cannot live without it.

DHMO does seem to be a very intriguing chemical. My very rudimentary research suggests it is used in a huge variety of industries, and yet the industries have kept its presence so well hidden. The stranglehold that they have on information is appalling. They have argued that DHMO "enhances the functionality, growth, and health of many forms of life". But there is no proof of this "fact".

I am even more surprised that the EU, which is normally at the forefront of industry regulation, has not cracked down on this overuse.

I thank and commend you on bringing this startling fact to our attention and urge you to take care of your health. Addiction is always a dangerous situation to be in.

[Richard W]

I am even more surprised that the EU, which is normally at the forefront of industry regulation, has not cracked down on this overuse.

They have taken some steps. Only two months ago, the Commission threatened to take the Spanish Government to court over a specific case of overuse.

[O_Relly]

Now this is worrying.