URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
  HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Everything not rugby related!
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 20224--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: Boonie Date: March 26, 2019, 7:21 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Haven't read too much of this thread as I'm sick to death of the
       whole thing, but just a minor point on the referendum - there is
       precedent for second votes. Ireland, for example, rejected the
       Lisbon Treaty in 2008 by a margin of 53.4% to 46.6% (53%
       turnout). The second referendum in 2009 approved it by 67.1% to
       32.9% (59% turnout). That could actually be construed as a third
       vote, as in 2001, they rejected the Treaty of Nice by 54%, with
       a 35% turnout. Earlier than that, Denmark rejected the
       Maastricht Treaty in 1992; it was rejected by 50.7% of voters
       with a turnout of 83.1%. Then in 1993 it was approved by 56.7%
       of voters with an 86.5% turnout.
       So, it is neither undemocratic nor unprecedented to have a
       follow-up vote based on the latest information that is
       available. It is not unreasonable either; a great deal of
       information has come to light that was either not available or
       not publicised in the first round of rhetoric and insults; we
       know far more about the detail of what leaving means and what
       the different shades of leaving mean.
       Of course, there is still a great deal of misinformation; for
       example there are those who would have you believe that GATT 24
       will ride to the rescue; however, if we left with no deal, then
       GATT 24 would simply not apply.
       All I know is that 30+ years working in the international supply
       chain industry leaves me with huge concerns about the entire
       situation; there are so few positives and so many negatives for
       supply chains, and whenever that happens, the only thing that
       goes up is prices.
       #Post#: 20323--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: guest257 Date: March 28, 2019, 3:41 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Wel we are clearly not going to leave tomorrow....And I can’t
       see anything changing between now and April or May so the can
       will keep getting kicked down the road.
       Yesterday’s votes show MPs can’t agree and don’t seem to know
       what they’re doing.
       I go through ups and downs with hope and justification for
       another referendum. My enthusiasm and hope for it is building
       now - I think it’s the only way out of this mess. The momentum
       is behind it now, I think.
       #Post#: 20324--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: guest257 Date: March 28, 2019, 3:46 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Boonie link=topic=616.msg20224#msg20224
       date=1553602876]
       Haven't read too much of this thread as I'm sick to death of the
       whole thing, but just a minor point on the referendum - there is
       precedent for second votes. Ireland, for example, rejected the
       Lisbon Treaty in 2008 by a margin of 53.4% to 46.6% (53%
       turnout). The second referendum in 2009 approved it by 67.1% to
       32.9% (59% turnout). That could actually be construed as a third
       vote, as in 2001, they rejected the Treaty of Nice by 54%, with
       a 35% turnout. Earlier than that, Denmark rejected the
       Maastricht Treaty in 1992; it was rejected by 50.7% of voters
       with a turnout of 83.1%. Then in 1993 it was approved by 56.7%
       of voters with an 86.5% turnout.
       So, it is neither undemocratic nor unprecedented to have a
       follow-up vote based on the latest information that is
       available. It is not unreasonable either; a great deal of
       information has come to light that was either not available or
       not publicised in the first round of rhetoric and insults; we
       know far more about the detail of what leaving means and what
       the different shades of leaving mean.
       Of course, there is still a great deal of misinformation; for
       example there are those who would have you believe that GATT 24
       will ride to the rescue; however, if we left with no deal, then
       GATT 24 would simply not apply.
       All I know is that 30+ years working in the international supply
       chain industry leaves me with huge concerns about the entire
       situation; there are so few positives and so many negatives for
       supply chains, and whenever that happens, the only thing that
       goes up is prices.
       [/quote]
       Agree with all of this.
       Just to add in my professional life I’ve not met one client or
       sector that is happy about Brexit. It’s been disruptive, costly,
       and will negatively impact growth and prospects over the longer
       term. Whilst not a fatal disaster in any individual sector, it’s
       a big ask for people to suck up more austerity, more job
       uncertainty, higher prices and less growth.
       If I’d met even one that was optimistic - seizing the
       opportunities - excites about the prospects - my views would be
       different - but in 3 years I’ve not met even 1.
       It’s not worth it.
       #Post#: 20421--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: Quinky Date: March 29, 2019, 8:52 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Boonie link=topic=616.msg20224#msg20224
       date=1553602876]
       Haven't read too much of this thread as I'm sick to death of the
       whole thing, but just a minor point on the referendum - there is
       precedent for second votes. Ireland, for example, rejected the
       Lisbon Treaty in 2008 by a margin of 53.4% to 46.6% (53%
       turnout). The second referendum in 2009 approved it by 67.1% to
       32.9% (59% turnout). That could actually be construed as a third
       vote, as in 2001, they rejected the Treaty of Nice by 54%, with
       a 35% turnout. Earlier than that, Denmark rejected the
       Maastricht Treaty in 1992; it was rejected by 50.7% of voters
       with a turnout of 83.1%. Then in 1993 it was approved by 56.7%
       of voters with an 86.5% turnout.
       [/quote]
       Some might say that this is an example of having more votes
       until the "right" result is achieved...
       #Post#: 20422--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: Quinky Date: March 29, 2019, 8:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=alexfromlondon link=topic=616.msg20324#msg20324
       date=1553762772]
       Agree with all of this.
       Just to add in my professional life I’ve not met one client
       or sector that is happy about Brexit. It’s been disruptive,
       costly, and will negatively impact growth and prospects over the
       longer term. Whilst not a fatal disaster in any individual
       sector, it’s a big ask for people to suck up more
       austerity, more job uncertainty, higher prices and less growth.
       If I’d met even one that was optimistic - seizing the
       opportunities - excites about the prospects - my views would be
       different - but in 3 years I’ve not met even 1.
       It’s not worth it.
       [/quote]
       Firstly, I have a question (which I've posted previously):
       IF there were a second referendum with a higher turnout, what
       would happen if the result were the same, or even with a higher
       margin? It seems that everyone crying out for a second vote is
       certain that the result would be reversed, but the same people
       would have been equally certain of a different outcome first
       time around, I feel.
       Secondly, I hate to buck the trend but I'm excited about the
       prospects post-Brexit.
       I am concerned about your predictions though: "more austerity,
       more job uncertainty, higher prices and less growth". "...will
       negatively impact growth and prospects over the longer term". I
       don't know what you do for a profession, but I'd question your
       ability to be so certain about these things. Before you suggest
       that many experts have stated these as certainties, that can be
       countered by other experts suggesting different or opposite
       outcomes.
       #Post#: 20430--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: BedfordshireBoy Date: March 29, 2019, 11:44 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=alexfromlondon link=topic=616.msg20323#msg20323
       date=1553762502]
       Wel we are clearly not going to leave tomorrow....And I can’t
       see anything changing between now and April or May so the can
       will keep getting kicked down the road.
       Yesterday’s votes show MPs can’t agree and don’t seem to know
       what they’re doing.
       I go through ups and downs with hope and justification for
       another referendum. My enthusiasm and hope for it is building
       now - I think it’s the only way out of this mess. The momentum
       is behind it now, I think.
       [/quote]
       What question(s) would you suggest (I can imagine you need 3),
       and how would the winner be declared, a simple majority as per
       the last one? I just cannot see this working.
       #Post#: 20772--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: guest257 Date: April 2, 2019, 7:05 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Am actually starting to think a no deal Brexit would be a good
       thing. It would mean the existing losers in charge would have to
       face up to their actions and would have no one to blame. It
       would give the country a massive education as they’d realise
       swiftly what they’d thrown away. There’d be a period of
       hardship, depression, probably civil unrest. But would lead to a
       cold hard dose of reality and humility for many.
       I think it might lead to a better politics in the future, born
       out of the hardship this created, and a more engaged and fair
       politics in the future.
       The irony is the next generation will probably be begging to
       rejoin the EU 10-15 years down the line.
       I’m mentally prepared for this carnage now and have completely
       given up on the current wastes of space in Westminster.
       #Post#: 20842--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: deadlyfrom5yardsout Date: April 3, 2019, 5:51 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       We definitely need to move to a much more consensual political
       system and get away from this unworkable and stupidly
       confrontational 2 party system with its constant blame culture.
       #Post#: 20857--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: A222Quin Date: April 3, 2019, 7:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Brexit has really shown how little in common some at each ends
       of the 2 main parties have with each other. Agree with the above
       on a less confrontational approach being desirable.
       #Post#: 21344--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Brexit
       By: guest257 Date: April 9, 2019, 1:09 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       So the Cooper-Letwin bill passes, reducing the risk of crashing
       out under no-deal. Can see the only way out being a long
       extension of a year or so for the country to get its act
       together. What happens in that period who knows?
       I can’t see a consensus being reached cross party as they are
       focussing on the wrong things - I.e freedom of movement,
       primarily; and are making a dogs dinner out of the rest of it.
       The irony is that “free movement” is something we could have had
       more control over in the past within the EU but have chosen not
       to.
       Another irony is the misunderstanding of immigration on a
       broader sense.
       Regarding “free trade” - I doubt anyone other than a tiny
       minority of disaster capitalists could quantify what these trade
       deals really mean for us. Also ironic, especially as we atte
       more powerful as party of a bigger group.
       “Take back control” is a sadly misleading phrase for us.
       Currently thinking that there won’t be another referendum or a
       dramatic revocation, but Brexit will slowly drift away from us
       over the next couple of years.
       When March 29 passed, I felt a tinge if sadness and sympathy for
       those disappointed about not leaving on that date.
       That feeling has gone, and I’m now back to the place where I
       think they just don’t deserve any sympathy at all. The leading
       Brexiteers ran away when the going got tough. No-one had a plan.
       And no-one really understood what on earth they were doing and
       why they were doing it.
       It has been middle England’s mid life mental breakdown, as they
       have struggled to keep pace with the modern world. It is sad to
       watch.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page