Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
GreenDevil

Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, crouch said:

The 2016 referendum was simply on the principle of leaving or staying and we know the result of that.

When you talk about "options" you presumbly mean to include staying in the EU. But as we've already had a referendum on that there's little point in having another. 

Furthermore the "options" would doubtless be costed up and I'm afaid to say this yet again but this is bound to be highly contentious and will result in widely differing views. Cvid 19 may well have far more effect than Brexit over the long run but who forecast a poentially game changing pandemic in 2016? 

As I attempted to explain in a previous post it's possible to rationalise the 2019 GE as other than a retrofit confirmatory referendum.

Well, its not just possible it obviously wasn't a confirmatory referendum it was mostly about Johnson (kept fresh in his fridge lol) vs Corbyn.

However see below for the classic Leaver rationalisation of the election:

1 hour ago, dryrot said:

What was the Tory election slogan again? Go on, have a try... :)

Just suppose, that the 2019 GE had been won stunningly by the LDs, with Jo Swinson as PM then leading the UK back into the EU/Euro and the Tories hammered.

What would you think of Brexiteers suggesting the GE meant nothing and an iffy opinion poll - with no stated numbers or categories of respondents - that showed 53% for Brexit, should be respected?

See ? I think the problem is so much store has been made on the democratic principle of the  2016 referendum  (the people decide)  that  that very democratic principle must be strangled to preserve the peoples 2016 preference. Speaking of which....

1 hour ago, crouch said:

You forget that we didn't have a vote for entry in 1973 and our constitution is still that of a representative democracy rather than a direct democracy. I would not have been saddened had the 2016 referendum not taken place; I believe the EU is a dead end with major dysfunctionalities and will disintegrate over time anyway and I would be quite content to stay in the interim.

You're simply forgetting the question - why can we NEVER have a vote on the ACTUAL choices in front of us ?

Is the whole point of direct democracy to get us to empower politicians to do things we would not vote for ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, crouch said:

A representative democracy is a system whereby you elect representatives to use their judgement on your behalf in order to govern in accordance with a broad mandate. It has nothing to do with the electoral system which is FPTP. It is that that decides who represents; representative democracy decides how they represent.

"A broad mandate"? Based on the party manifesto? How does that work when the manifesto is a pack of lies?

Representative democracy no longer works, too many liars, too many lies, and no sanctions when exposed!

 

 

Edited by Bruce Banner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, pig said:

Well, its not just possible it obviously wasn't a confirmatory referendum it was mostly about Johnson (kept fresh in his fridge lol) vs Corbyn.

However see below for the classic Leaver rationalisation of the election:

It would be wrong to say that personalities didn't come into the 2019 election but it's also wrong to deny that the "let's get Brexit done" also didn't strike a chord among many who had seen the process drag on over three years. What the relative weighting of these issues is I've no idea but dismissing the Brexit factor would be wrong.

16 minutes ago, pig said:

See ? I think the problem is so much store has been made on the democratic principle of the  2016 referendum  (the people decide)  that  that very democratic principle must be strangled to preserve the peoples 2016 preference. Speaking of which....

Perhaps one of the reasons why we rarely have referenda is that the occasional intrusion of direct democracy into a system of repsentative democracy is wont to cause these sorts of problems.

19 minutes ago, pig said:

You're simply forgetting the question - why can we NEVER have a vote on the ACTUAL choices in front of us ?

Is the whole point of direct democracy to get us to empower politicians to do things we would not vote for ?

You can. But the gradual elision of direct democracy with representative democracy is likely to cause more instability and more problems like this. 

One of the major problems with direct democracy is that you have to reduce, what in many cases are very complicated, issues issues to a degree of simplicity that it can be voted on. This may mean that it does not get the consideration it deserves or requires. Which is best: a direct democracy which involves people more or a system of representative democracy which delegates issues to representatives? I favour the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

"A broad mandate"? Based on the party manifesto? How does that work when the manifesto a pack of lies?

Representative democracy no longer works, too many liars, too many lies, and no sanctions when exposed!

 

This is all opinion. And a direct democracy has more association with autocracy precisely because of the opportunities to fabricate lies and propaganda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, crouch said:

This is all opinion. And a direct democracy has more association with autocracy precisely because of the opportunities to fabricate lies and propaganda.

It works for the Swiss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crouch said:

In all honesty that vote to me means very little, and indeed meant very little at the time. It was held only two years after joining the EEC and was, to my mind totally unjustified. Putting it another way I would not have given the people the option of leaving the EEC after only two years; I would have simply continued with membership of the EEC.

Well - that is just you. Obviously the government at the time felt that the people should have a say in the direction that the country had taken.

Quote

The problem here is that you can't see what's in front of your face. Brexit is for the long term and the situation we find ourselves in will most likely change substantially even in the next ten years let alone twenty or thirty. What is needed is flexibility to meet contingencies and that can best be given in the context of the current constitutional means of representative democracy, rather than asking the people every five miniutes what they want.

Brexit has happened. The bit that is missing is the 'what is next?'. We should definately have a say as to what comes next.

Quote

You care nothing for this as you would hope to reverse the initial result but your ostensible reasons will simply tie the hands of the government and make a satisfactory outcome less likely.

The only thing I care about is ensuring a truly democratic outcome. And yes... I do believe that the referendum was gamed...deliberatley by Dom Cummings own admission. The problem for  leavers is that 'what comes next?'.... it needs to be agreed on.... people should be asked either before, or a couple of years after it has happened. That seems fair to me.

I just don't buy into your kick the question into the long grass answer... I don't suspect many do. It is simply one of your silly little games. 

I do have faith that the right thing will be done and soon. If and when there is a clamour to re-join or if there is disillusionment with whatever brexit tuns out to be... then a political party will seize the opportunity to use that to gain power and do something about it. There is not much that can stop that process.

 

Edited by IMHAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, crouch said:

One of the major problems with direct democracy is that you have to reduce, what in many cases are very complicated, issues issues to a degree of simplicity that it can be voted on. This may mean that it does not get the consideration it deserves or requires. Which is best: a direct democracy which involves people more or a system of representative democracy which delegates issues to representatives? I favour the latter.

What better way to reassert the primacy of the latter than for our representatives to rejoin the EU without a further referendum, thus confirming the supremacy of parliament?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Well - that is just you. Obviously the government at the time felt that the people should have a say in the direction that the country had taken.

No I think the reasons were to paper over the cracks of a divided Labour party perhaps more than anything. To hold a vote after only two years membership is ridiculous; very difficult to justify.

23 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Brexit has happened. The bit that is missing is the 'what is next?'. We should definately have a say as to what comes next.

You just can't see this can you? You want to tie the government's hands down even more which means it has less flexibility in a crisis and less room for manoevre generally.

It also undermines by stealth the whole principle of representative democracy.

Really just idiocy.

26 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

I just don't buy into your kick the question into the long grass answer... I don't suspect many do. It is simply one of your silly little games. 

Again you just don't get it do you? No one is kicking the question into the long grass; they don't have to because it's already there! I expect, and I am not alone, that the government will manage the ongoing situation in the context of policies that it has presented to the electorate in a manifesto. That's how the system works; that's what gives it flexibility. Government erects the framework and private individuals then adapt to changing circumstances.

My "silly little game" is how the system actually works not some crypto Soviet fantasy which seems to be your ideal.

33 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

I do have faith that the right thing will be done and soon. If and when there is a clamour to re-join or if there is disillusionment with whatever brexit tuns out to be... then a political party will seize the opportunity to use that to gain power and do something about it. There is not much that can stop that process.

If that is a legitimate process there is nothing that should stop it but it has the air of much of your views - fantasy laced with quiet desperation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, thecrashingisles said:

What better way to reassert the primacy of the latter than for our representatives to rejoin the EU without a further referendum, thus confirming the supremacy of parliament?

Why not go the whole hog and vote to end parliament?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

You just can't see this can you? You want to tie the government's hands down even more which means it has less flexibility in a crisis and less room for manoevre generally.

It also undermines by stealth the whole principle of representative democracy.

Brexit seems to have tied down the government and reduced it's flexibility by excluding joining the EU does it not?

Quote

Really just idiocy.

Again you just don't get it do you? No one is kicking the question into the long grass; they don't have to because it's already there! I expect, and I am not alone, that the government will manage the ongoing situation in the context of policies that it has presented to the electorate in a manifesto. That's how the system works; that's what gives it flexibility. Government erects the framework and private individuals then adapt to changing circumstances.

And so it should. If that includes the option to re-join due to Brexit being seen as a failure...then so be it. It that perception happens in the short term then again, so be it.

Quote

My "silly little game" is how the system actually works not some crypto Soviet fantasy which seems to be your ideal.

If that is a legitimate process there is nothing that should stop it but it has the air of much of your views - fantasy laced with quiet desperation.

Fantasy or desperation? The perception of the people is the perception of the people, it will be not be fantasy but it may be born of desperation to extract us from a Brexit process that will be seen as 'not working' in the interests of the people. 

Edited by IMHAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Brexit seems to have tied down the government and reduced it's flexibility by excluding joining the EU does it not?

Rejoining the EU is always a possibility so the answer is - no.

21 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

And so it should. If that includes the option to re-join due to Brexit being seen as a failure...then so be it. It that perception happens in the short term then again, so be it.

I don't disagree but Brexit has to be given time to work or, as you would have it - fail.

23 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

Fantasy or desperation? The perception of the people is the perception of the people, it will be not be fantasy but it may be born of desperation to extract us from a Brexit process that will be seen as 'not working' in the interests of the people.

I see we have our "futurist" goggles on today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, crouch said:

Rejoining the EU is always a possibility so the answer is - no.

Good. Progress. Except that many leavers on here argue that that option is verbotten. 

Quote

I don't disagree but Brexit has to be given time to work or, as you would have it - fail.

The timeframe will be decided upon by the will of the people and not some arbitrary period set by you or anyone else.

Quote

I see we have our "futurist" goggles on today.

I did say 'may'.... it is simply a statement of one of the future possibilities. It's good to plan ahead :)

 

Edited by IMHAL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, IMHAL said:

The timeframe will be decided upon by the will of the people and not some arbitrary period set by you or anyone else.

It normally isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, crouch said:

In all honesty that vote to me means very little, and indeed meant very little at the time. It was held only two years after joining the EEC and was, to my mind totally unjustified. Putting it another way I would not have given the people the option of leaving the EEC after only two years; I would have simply continued with membership of the EEC.

The problem here is that you can't see what's in front of your face. Brexit is for the long term and the situation we find ourselves in will most likely change substantially even in the next ten years let alone twenty or thirty. What is needed is flexibility to meet contingencies and that can best be given in the context of the current constitutional means of representative democracy, rather than asking the people every five miniutes what they want.

You care nothing for this as you would hope to reverse the initial result but your ostensible reasons will simply tie the hands of the government and make a satisfactory outcome less likely.

A representative democracy is a system whereby you elect representatives to use their judgement on your behalf in order to govern in accordance with a broad mandate. It has nothing to do with the electoral system which is FPTP. It is that that decides who represents; representative democracy decides how they represent.

Look, thickie, explain what the long term advantages are. Specifically.

And, here is the thing, because I am very polite I am going to write to you the point all over again.

People who have grown cynical of the modern world will be less likely to accept new things they are told. So, things that are ephemeral, like the need for the EU or global warming will be met with increased skepticism. That will also mean that people who believe in the need for the EU and global warming, or even evolution will seem naive.

The test is what works in reality.

The planet really is getting hotter. Biology does a good job of modelling biological systems and leaving the EU really is proving complicated and leaving us in a weaker position.

So, it might be a simple mistake, an emotional hark back to better times, or have really brill long term advantages that are specific, measureable and secret.

So, thickie, what are the secret, specific measureable advantages and I will have to eat humble pie and accept you really are smart....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thecrashingisles said:

I've realised your problem. You don't understand your own arguments.

If you ask why people believe in evolution, they will start to cite the science, even though they do not understand it. In reality, they trust people who tell them it is true.

So it is with brexit. They are skeptical of being told what is what by the modern political society adn assume it is all nonsense. But, rather than say that, they repeat arguments they do not understand.

We should remember, just as evolution is correct, so might brexit be. The difference is that we have people who can explain why evolution is correct, whereas the advantages of brexit appear to be a big secret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IMHAL said:

Good. Progress. Except that many leavers on here argue that that option is not verboten. 

The timeframe will be decided upon by the will of the people and not some arbitrary period set by you or anyone else.

I did say 'may'.... it is simply a statement of one of the future possibilities. It's good to plan ahead :)

Time is fair enough, but it cannot be give time to work if it does not having any objectives. I could shit on the kitchen floor and when my wife objects tell her that it is a project that needs time to work.

It is a fair assertion, but needs a description of what it is trying to achieve and how. That appears to be a secret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bruce Banner said:

Does anyone know how Cummings' Internet troops paid?  By the post?

I think they really believe this.

Again, people believe in lots of things they do not understand. I believe in climate change, but do not really understand it very well. I favoured Remain as demographics would predict, but do not really understand much about it.

In each case, my irrational belief has been born out by facts. But many would think they are clever adn rational and not change their mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

How did one man manage to keep his job after his trip to Durham and drive to test his eyesight? The man has powerful bosses.

He's running things.

For example, let's remind ourselves he was allowed into the NATO summit. WTF ?

https://postofasia.com/dominic-cummings-pictured-inside-nato-summit-regardless-of-no10-saying-he-resigned-from-authorities-for-the-election/

He's behind giving David Frost the job of control over the total security of the nation too. That's the military and all our security services. Just the right man for the job. Perfect qualifications. Knows feck-all and can be manipulated.

WHERE'S THE FECKING RUSSIAN REPORT ???????

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

So, thickie, what are the secret, specific measureable advantages and I will have to eat humble pie and accept you really are smart....

Where have I said there are secret and measureable advantages?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, erat_forte said:

The UK can't stay in the EU, it has left, it is no longer a member. Brexit is done, finished, and has been for 6 months now.

Did you think it was still 2019? Or are you deliberately misrepresenting the current situation? Or something else I have overlooked in my ignorance?

 

The question is what next, how should the future relationship be defined, organised, negotiated. Anyone who says "rejoin" is naive at best, that would be a huge undertaking to apply to join as a non-member.

Yup. It's absolutely amazing. I feel so much better. The dream, the better world. The blinding vision of change for the better. The Aryan landscape is so perfect, a bight white light.

What about you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, crouch said:

Where have I said there are secret and measureable advantages?

See, thickie it is.

You say there are these advantages, but refuse to state specifically what they are when exactly when they will appear.

So, either is it nonsense or you really do have a girlfriend but she goes to a different school they are a big secret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 399 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.