Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. " I've already started another thread use that! Also how would the argument you outline even apply to this argument? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. " I gave you a link about what it means to be in the EU. I'd suggest starting there. Otherwise starting more threads about how confused you are just isn't productive. Especially if you don't take on board any information that's given to you. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. " British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. " Excellent post | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. " My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol" Fewer or more expensive avocados wouldn’t be a bad thing .... would reduce the number of avocado related injuries at A&E departments  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol" Are you acknowledging a downside of Brexit here? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol Are you acknowledging a downside of Brexit here? " Nope, see my earlier post about tariffs being a zero sum game. More work for British farmers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. " Well said  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol Are you acknowledging a downside of Brexit here? Nope, see my earlier post about tariffs being a zero sum game. More work for British farmers. " You realise what Partick Minford said about this situation in regard to farming don't you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. " So the people who want to remain now would have been the people who wouldn't have wanted to join/remain in the first place. Hmmm interesting | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol Are you acknowledging a downside of Brexit here? Nope, see my earlier post about tariffs being a zero sum game. More work for British farmers. " Why do you start these treads if you genuinely have no understanding of the impact of brexit? Do you really not have a clue about the impact tarriffs will have? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a lot. In 2 or 3 years time it will be hard to find someone who will admit to voting Remain. It's a bit like that now, trying to find someone who admits to voting for Corbyn " You mean leave | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"One of my issues is how it's become a them against us thing. When you are in a trading block you will agree with some countries on some things and disagree on others. Yet the whole narrative has been shaped into them ganging up on us,telling us what to do. Utter bollocks of course but that is where the whole taking back control nonsense comes from. Its obvious driven by the media and not helped by the fucking clown chatting shit about no surrender. Other countries must look at us and think.. what a fucking basket case." I don’t think that there has ever been a trade negotiation in history whose aim was to increase barriers to trade, rather than remove them. Trade deals are by their nature are supposed to be about promoting interdependency for the betterment of both sides and enabling commerce to freely benefit. The irony of the U.K. negotiating to remove interdependency and to erect barriers that didn’t exist will be the root of our embarrassment for generations. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"One of my issues is how it's become a them against us thing. When you are in a trading block you will agree with some countries on some things and disagree on others. Yet the whole narrative has been shaped into them ganging up on us,telling us what to do. Utter bollocks of course but that is where the whole taking back control nonsense comes from. Its obvious driven by the media and not helped by the fucking clown chatting shit about no surrender. Other countries must look at us and think.. what a fucking basket case. I don’t think that there has ever been a trade negotiation in history whose aim was to increase barriers to trade, rather than remove them. Trade deals are by their nature are supposed to be about promoting interdependency for the betterment of both sides and enabling commerce to freely benefit. The irony of the U.K. negotiating to remove interdependency and to erect barriers that didn’t exist will be the root of our embarrassment for generations. " I think you are a little confused. We are looking to lower barriers with our biggest export market, which is the rest of the world | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol Are you acknowledging a downside of Brexit here? Nope, see my earlier post about tariffs being a zero sum game. More work for British farmers. " Last time I checked there were not many uk pineapple farmers.... Or orange farmers Or lemon farmers | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol" The U.K. has been unable to feed itself since 1865 and considering that we now have less than one quarter of the farms that we had back then - the situation is far worse now. You may not remember sugar rationing and flour shortages in the 1970’s but the necessity of food reliance was a big factor in the original EEC debates. You must see the irony in a discussion that was always supposed to be about Britain being great again will actually result in barriers erected to the supply of food for the people who live here. If accepting less choice in the supermarkets and/or higher prices at the till is the price for Brexit - then it is a very strange kind of victory that inflicts economic harm on the population. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. British Exceptionalism exists in the psyche of this country. It is real and it is there because since the days of the Empire the U.K. land mass has never been invaded and our population has never experienced the kinds of mass murder and tribulations that have been seen in Europe. This damaging aspect in our psyche is responsible for fantasist thoughts that Britain can again soar victoriously as a world power - if only we could cast off the shackles of being hamstrung by pesky Europeans. It is just that - fantasy. We entered the EEC because in the post war era, British Exceptionalism came up against reality. Suez embarrassed the nation (to the degree that it isn’t even taught in history any more) and in the 1970’s there were sugar and flour shortages snd a final realisation that we could not feed ourselves and needed a reliable food supply chain. None of those things have changed - if anything the need to work together in a co-operating bloc is more relevant now than it was in the 1970’s because our need for imported food and resources is even greater now than it was then. I suggest that you think about the power and influence of the Conservative Party. Their money, influence and power of the media guaranteed our vote into the EEC in the 1970’s as a means of stabilising the nation. That same money, influence and power over the media 50 years later is being used to protect a much lower taxed super rich element of our society who see Britain outside of the EU as being much easier to manipulate. My goodness, how will we ever survive if Spanish avacodos go up 10% in price lol Are you acknowledging a downside of Brexit here? Nope, see my earlier post about tariffs being a zero sum game. More work for British farmers. " Rubbish. Farms cannot suddenly be repurposed. Where does the money come? There are nowhere near enough farms or farmland in this country to even come close to feeding this country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a lot. In 2 or 3 years time it will be hard to find someone who will admit to voting Remain. It's a bit like that now, trying to find someone who admits to voting for Corbyn " Not a single person has yet articulated a reason as to why the U.K. is now better placed to “go it alone” in 2021 than it was in 1973. Today we have less mass manufacturing, less exports, less arable farming and we require more imported food and natural resources. This is simple stuff. The reasons that we joined the EEC in 1973 are still the same - probably even more so today. Your assertion is wrong. The vast majority of the world have never been able to see or understand the mindset behind Brexit. The reason being is that most of the world is not affected by the sense of Exceptionalism that is peculiar to many Brits. It will take a while for the investment in the U.K. to dry up and for the feeling of being left behind to to turn into a reality of being left behind and then... there will be a lot of questions as to how we allowed such self-harm to befall the nation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought farmers were up in arms about leaving There was 1 on 5 live who was very worried. He should come on.here and his fears will he allayed." Up in arms? Didn't the majority of farmers vote to leave? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"One of my issues is how it's become a them against us thing. When you are in a trading block you will agree with some countries on some things and disagree on others. Yet the whole narrative has been shaped into them ganging up on us,telling us what to do. Utter bollocks of course but that is where the whole taking back control nonsense comes from. Its obvious driven by the media and not helped by the fucking clown chatting shit about no surrender. Other countries must look at us and think.. what a fucking basket case. I don’t think that there has ever been a trade negotiation in history whose aim was to increase barriers to trade, rather than remove them. Trade deals are by their nature are supposed to be about promoting interdependency for the betterment of both sides and enabling commerce to freely benefit. The irony of the U.K. negotiating to remove interdependency and to erect barriers that didn’t exist will be the root of our embarrassment for generations. I think you are a little confused. We are looking to lower barriers with our biggest export market, which is the rest of the world " It is impossible to lower barriers and retain absolute sovereignty. Just think about it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a lot. In 2 or 3 years time it will be hard to find someone who will admit to voting Remain. It's a bit like that now, trying to find someone who admits to voting for Corbyn Not a single person has yet articulated a reason as to why the U.K. is now better placed to “go it alone” in 2021 than it was in 1973. Today we have less mass manufacturing, less exports, less arable farming and we require more imported food and natural resources. This is simple stuff. The reasons that we joined the EEC in 1973 are still the same - probably even more so today. Your assertion is wrong. The vast majority of the world have never been able to see or understand the mindset behind Brexit. The reason being is that most of the world is not affected by the sense of Exceptionalism that is peculiar to many Brits. It will take a while for the investment in the U.K. to dry up and for the feeling of being left behind to to turn into a reality of being left behind and then... there will be a lot of questions as to how we allowed such self-harm to befall the nation. " Your 2nd paragraph helps to confirm why we were probably wrong to join in the first place and right to leave now | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not a lot. In 2 or 3 years time it will be hard to find someone who will admit to voting Remain. It's a bit like that now, trying to find someone who admits to voting for Corbyn Not a single person has yet articulated a reason as to why the U.K. is now better placed to “go it alone” in 2021 than it was in 1973. Today we have less mass manufacturing, less exports, less arable farming and we require more imported food and natural resources. This is simple stuff. The reasons that we joined the EEC in 1973 are still the same - probably even more so today. Your assertion is wrong. The vast majority of the world have never been able to see or understand the mindset behind Brexit. The reason being is that most of the world is not affected by the sense of Exceptionalism that is peculiar to many Brits. It will take a while for the investment in the U.K. to dry up and for the feeling of being left behind to to turn into a reality of being left behind and then... there will be a lot of questions as to how we allowed such self-harm to befall the nation. Your 2nd paragraph helps to confirm why we were probably wrong to join in the first place and right to leave now" Yeah spectacular own goal going the 2md biggest economy in the world | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought farmers were up in arms about leaving There was 1 on 5 live who was very worried. He should come on.here and his fears will he allayed. Up in arms? Didn't the majority of farmers vote to leave? " Well the ones who have had their budgets cut by 95% dont seem to happy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A trade deal will be done one way or the other i think thats pretty obvious now, we will be free to make deals with the rest of the world and life will go on. "Point me to the economist(s) that say Brexit is a good idea? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought farmers were up in arms about leaving There was 1 on 5 live who was very worried. He should come on.here and his fears will he allayed. Up in arms? Didn't the majority of farmers vote to leave? Well the ones who have had their budgets cut by 95% dont seem to happy." Im sure that the duke of norfolk ,con mp richard drax and vicount ridley the biggest beneficiaries will be flattered by your concerns about loosing their eu subsidies. There was me thinking all this time you didnt like rich people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. " The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A trade deal will be done one way or the other i think thats pretty obvious now, we will be free to make deals with the rest of the world and life will go on.
Point me to the economist(s) that say Brexit is a good idea? "There was one. Minford, who said Brexit would destroy British manufacturing and farming. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A trade deal will be done one way or the other i think thats pretty obvious now, we will be free to make deals with the rest of the world and life will go on.
Point me to the economist(s) that say Brexit is a good idea?
There was one. Minford, who said Brexit would destroy British manufacturing and farming."Yeah, JRM's mate. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. " How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"A trade deal will be done one way or the other i think thats pretty obvious now, we will be free to make deals with the rest of the world and life will go on.
Point me to the economist(s) that say Brexit is a good idea?
There was one. Minford, who said Brexit would destroy British manufacturing and farming."Destroying British manufacturing and farming is a good idea? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? " An atomic bomb detonating in my living room would be bad for my house. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? An atomic bomb detonating in my living room would be bad for my house." We have seen an atomic bomb explode  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? An atomic bomb detonating in my living room would be bad for my house. We have seen an atomic bomb explode "Not in my living room we haven't but We've seen evidence of WTO terms not being as good as free trade agreements, we've seen evidence of the UK already not getting as good trade deals. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? An atomic bomb detonating in my living room would be bad for my house. We have seen an atomic bomb explode
Not in my living room we haven't but We've seen evidence of WTO terms not being as good as free trade agreements, we've seen evidence of the UK already not getting as good trade deals."Pity. There is no evidence that the UK will be worse off out of the EU. Spin it how you like it is pure speculation | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? " It says a lot that even that @@@@ saw the benefits of it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? " I guess that's the only point to these Brexit threads. To see which leaver can say the most ridiculous things. I shouldn't keep coming here, but it's like a car crash. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? " You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? " Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? " The article julia and chris from the FT pointed out that world trade was shrinking, so who are you going to deal with? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. " Paul nuttall? Nigel farage? Jacob Reece mogg? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. " As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then. "It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? "yeah sailed it too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too. "Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on. But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?"How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
"There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up. You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?"they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to. "All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy."When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?"I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick. The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK. There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU. So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. Paul nuttall? Nigel farage? Jacob Reece mogg?" None of them are interested in Brexit benefiting the population of the UK. They are interested in how a deregulated UK can benefit themselves and their backers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?
I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick.
The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK.
There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU.
So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be."As i have said before you whole argument is based on the eu being the only people we can trade with,have for instance they taken into account singapore and vietnam which were signed a couple of days ago.Do they know the final outcome of the talks with the eu. i know you like a bit of doom and gloom but some of us wait until things are certain before being either up or downbeat.You really should try it . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?
I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick.
The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK.
There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU.
So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be.As i have said before you whole argument is based on the eu being the only people we can trade with,have for instance they taken into account singapore and vietnam which were signed a couple of days ago.Do they know the final outcome of the talks with the eu.
i know you like a bit of doom and gloom but some of us wait until things are certain before being either up or downbeat.You really should try it ."You still haven't answered my question, will we get as good a deal as being in the single market? You can't post any studies to suggest Brexit will be an economical success either, your attitude is a rather childish we won't know until it happens...Who on earth bases huge economical decisions on that premise? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?
I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick.
The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK.
There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU.
So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be.As i have said before you whole argument is based on the eu being the only people we can trade with,have for instance they taken into account singapore and vietnam which were signed a couple of days ago.Do they know the final outcome of the talks with the eu.
i know you like a bit of doom and gloom but some of us wait until things are certain before being either up or downbeat.You really should try it ."It's not my argument. It's the argument of economists. The classic "stop being negative" argument. This has been rolled out since the day after the referendum, and slowly erodes as pieces of "project fear" become reality. I'm all for a positive attitude, but when the least worst option is still shit, some down to earth realism is called for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?
I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick.
The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK.
There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU.
So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be.As i have said before you whole argument is based on the eu being the only people we can trade with,have for instance they taken into account singapore and vietnam which were signed a couple of days ago.Do they know the final outcome of the talks with the eu.
i know you like a bit of doom and gloom but some of us wait until things are certain before being either up or downbeat.You really should try it .
It's not my argument. It's the argument of economists.
The classic "stop being negative" argument. This has been rolled out since the day after the referendum, and slowly erodes as pieces of "project fear" become reality.
I'm all for a positive attitude, but when the least worst option is still shit, some down to earth realism is called for."That doesn't seem to be a statement of a positive person who still doesnt know the outcome yet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?
I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick.
The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK.
There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU.
So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be.As i have said before you whole argument is based on the eu being the only people we can trade with,have for instance they taken into account singapore and vietnam which were signed a couple of days ago.Do they know the final outcome of the talks with the eu.
i know you like a bit of doom and gloom but some of us wait until things are certain before being either up or downbeat.You really should try it .
It's not my argument. It's the argument of economists.
The classic "stop being negative" argument. This has been rolled out since the day after the referendum, and slowly erodes as pieces of "project fear" become reality.
I'm all for a positive attitude, but when the least worst option is still shit, some down to earth realism is called for.That doesn't seem to be a statement of a positive person who still doesnt know the outcome yet. "The IFS modelled 4 scenarios with no Brexit being the best economically, The Government also modelled 4 scenarios and found No Brexit was best. Schroders modelled 3 and choosing to remain in the EU was best economically The LSE found Brexit will be more economiocally damaging than Covid in the long run The OBR also found the same thing. Are all these sources liars? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?
I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick.
The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK.
There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU.
So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be.As i have said before you whole argument is based on the eu being the only people we can trade with,have for instance they taken into account singapore and vietnam which were signed a couple of days ago.Do they know the final outcome of the talks with the eu.
i know you like a bit of doom and gloom but some of us wait until things are certain before being either up or downbeat.You really should try it .
It's not my argument. It's the argument of economists.
The classic "stop being negative" argument. This has been rolled out since the day after the referendum, and slowly erodes as pieces of "project fear" become reality.
I'm all for a positive attitude, but when the least worst option is still shit, some down to earth realism is called for.That doesn't seem to be a statement of a positive person who still doesnt know the outcome yet. "So you think that massive economic decisions should be based on que sera sera? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless " They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too?" When have they ever been right about anything? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? " https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? " https://fullfact.org/economy/how-accurate-have-brexit-forecasts-been-referendum/ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3" The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the unreal levels of delusion from Brexiters on here have now reached the level of denying there is any benefit in being in the single market? I guess Thatcher just wanted it for a laugh? You have to move with the times just like any business otherwise you get left behind the uk trade is shrinking with the eu and there are growing markets in the rest of the world.Do you want to be tied to a shrinking market? Once again, point me to any economist or economic forecast that say Brexit will benefit the UK. As i said in a previous post there will be a deal done with the eu . its all irrelevant the uk is out and use the eu for a time while free to build trade elsewhere. Once Australia is sealed it should be a given that we will join the trans pacific deal then we will be the ones reducing trade not the eu. I also expect now that biden is in he will go back on trumps pulling out of trade talks with the trans pacific hopefully we will be in it by then.
It's not irrelevant though is it! Will the deal be better or worse than being in the single market. As for the Trans Pacific, have you ever looked at a globe? yeah sailed it too.
Well you'll note geographically it's not idea for us to concentrate trade on.
But anyhow, do you have any evidence of Brexit being economically beneficial to the UK from an economist or economic study?How can anyone predict what the pro,s and cons are without knowing the uk,s final position after the negotiations?
There are plenty of economic forecasts out there surely one must back Brexit being a good idea up.
You still haven't answered if you think we'll get as good a deal as being in the single market, why are you not answering this?they are all irrelevent until you know a final position.Your whole argument is based on the eu you need to take into account the rest of the world and emerging markets that we are now finally free to talk to.
All of the economic forecasts have always said that even the least damaging version of brexit (long since binned) would severely damage the economy.When were these written ,do they know the final outcome of the talks?
I would say they have been written since prior to the referendum. And have been updated continuously. There is a shit tonne of information available about the economic consequences of Brexit. You may take your pick.
The point is. There is no new/unexpected nuances to whatever deal we end up with, which will magically make Brexit a positive for the UK.
There is no option for any deal to be as good as the one we had as a member of the EU.
So the "we don't know what will happen" is only true to an extent. We don't know how bad it will be.As i have said before you whole argument is based on the eu being the only people we can trade with,have for instance they taken into account singapore and vietnam which were signed a couple of days ago.Do they know the final outcome of the talks with the eu.
i know you like a bit of doom and gloom but some of us wait until things are certain before being either up or downbeat.You really should try it .
It's not my argument. It's the argument of economists.
The classic "stop being negative" argument. This has been rolled out since the day after the referendum, and slowly erodes as pieces of "project fear" become reality.
I'm all for a positive attitude, but when the least worst option is still shit, some down to earth realism is called for.That doesn't seem to be a statement of a positive person who still doesnt know the outcome yet. "I'm open for some positivity. Is there any, even vague, inkling that any of the options offer anything positive? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong "So you are saying people who have devoted their lives to the study of economics are always wrong. And paul nuttall and nigel farage are right? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong "The thing is I can rely on economists, you can't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong
The thing is I can rely on economists, you can't. "Good luck with that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong
The thing is I can rely on economists, you can't.
Good luck with that "Ok then, do you think that well get a deal with the EU as good as being in the single market? Please answer yes or No. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong
The thing is I can rely on economists, you can't.
Good luck with that "What does that even mean I posted several studies that all agreed Brexit will be economically damaging, how do I need luck. Can you post any that say it won't be damaging? The answer is no, and thats why you don't like economists | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong
The thing is I can rely on economists, you can't.
Good luck with that
Ok then, do you think that well get a deal with the EU as good as being in the single market? Please answer yes or No."Yes or no
As long as we are not tied to the ECJ or EU rules any deal with the EU will be better than being in the single market | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong
The thing is I can rely on economists, you can't.
Good luck with that
What does that even mean I posted several studies that all agreed Brexit will be economically damaging, how do I need luck. Can you post any that say it won't be damaging? The answer is no, and thats why you don't like economists"Did you bother to Google - why are economists always wrong - or do you prefer to bury your head in the sand when something goes against what you believe? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen " I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply." I'm a troll because I keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments or proving you wrong? Whatever 2008 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply. I'm a troll because I keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments or proving you wrong? Whatever 2008 " No, you troll because you ignore any points made and are just trying to find some kind of "win" via semantics. So in 2007 Lehman brothers collapsed. And you're suggesting that because most economists didn't predict this, (which how could they, it was such a specific circumstance), that all economics is now false? If so, I would suggest that this is an extremely weak argument. So far they predicted that Brexit would be bad for the economy, and they have been right. £200 billion cost in 2020 alone, and we were still able to avail of the EU market as we had been. To summarise. All predictions saying Brexit will be a negative. All evidence suggests it will be negative, everything that's happened so far has been negative. Some people on a swingers forum think that Brexit is great, yet have no information to back this up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply. I'm a troll because I keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments or proving you wrong? Whatever 2008 " You still haven't acknowledge you were wrong about the Japan trade deal yet! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Economists are almost always wrong and when they don't even have all the facts making predictions is pretty pointless They just aren't though, and also do you watch the weather forecast? are they make up too? When have they ever been right about anything? https://www.ft.com/content/691e3c92-051e-11e9-9d01-cd4d49afbbe3 The Financial Times
Give me a break. If you have to rely on economists to make an argument then you really don't have one. Just Google why economists are always wrong
The thing is I can rely on economists, you can't.
Good luck with that
What does that even mean I posted several studies that all agreed Brexit will be economically damaging, how do I need luck. Can you post any that say it won't be damaging? The answer is no, and thats why you don't like economists
Did you bother to Google - why are economists always wrong - or do you prefer to bury your head in the sand when something goes against what you believe? "This came up: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50310815 it hardly backs you up? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply." That's basically it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply. I'm a troll because I keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments or proving you wrong? Whatever 2008 No, you troll because you ignore any points made and are just trying to find some kind of "win" via semantics. So in 2007 Lehman brothers collapsed. And you're suggesting that because most economists didn't predict this, (which how could they, it was such a specific circumstance), that all economics is now false? If so, I would suggest that this is an extremely weak argument. So far they predicted that Brexit would be bad for the economy, and they have been right. £200 billion cost in 2020 alone, and we were still able to avail of the EU market as we had been. To summarise. All predictions saying Brexit will be a negative. All evidence suggests it will be negative, everything that's happened so far has been negative. Some people on a swingers forum think that Brexit is great, yet have no information to back this up." How has Brexit been bad for the economy? We didn't leave the EU until January, the covid crisis struck in March and we are still tied to EU rules until the new year. If you make that statement 2 or 3 years from now then it might hold some validity  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply. I'm a troll because I keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments or proving you wrong? Whatever 2008 No, you troll because you ignore any points made and are just trying to find some kind of "win" via semantics. So in 2007 Lehman brothers collapsed. And you're suggesting that because most economists didn't predict this, (which how could they, it was such a specific circumstance), that all economics is now false? If so, I would suggest that this is an extremely weak argument. So far they predicted that Brexit would be bad for the economy, and they have been right. £200 billion cost in 2020 alone, and we were still able to avail of the EU market as we had been. To summarise. All predictions saying Brexit will be a negative. All evidence suggests it will be negative, everything that's happened so far has been negative. Some people on a swingers forum think that Brexit is great, yet have no information to back this up. How has Brexit been bad for the economy? We didn't leave the EU until January, the covid crisis struck in March and we are still tied to EU rules until the new year. If you make that statement 2 or 3 years from now then it might hold some validity "Loss of GDP compared to pre-bexit forecasts compared with other countries. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply. I'm a troll because I keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments or proving you wrong? Whatever 2008 No, you troll because you ignore any points made and are just trying to find some kind of "win" via semantics. So in 2007 Lehman brothers collapsed. And you're suggesting that because most economists didn't predict this, (which how could they, it was such a specific circumstance), that all economics is now false? If so, I would suggest that this is an extremely weak argument. So far they predicted that Brexit would be bad for the economy, and they have been right. £200 billion cost in 2020 alone, and we were still able to avail of the EU market as we had been. To summarise. All predictions saying Brexit will be a negative. All evidence suggests it will be negative, everything that's happened so far has been negative. Some people on a swingers forum think that Brexit is great, yet have no information to back this up. How has Brexit been bad for the economy? We didn't leave the EU until January, the covid crisis struck in March and we are still tied to EU rules until the new year. If you make that statement 2 or 3 years from now then it might hold some validity
Loss of GDP compared to pre-bexit forecasts compared with other countries.""The U.K.’s exit from the European Union has already cost the U.K. a chunk of its economic output, according to the latest analysis by economists at UBS. “U.K. gross domestic product (GDP) is already 2.1 percent lower in level terms than where it would have been without Brexit,” UBS economists Pierre Lafourcade and Arend Kapteyn, and strategist John Wraith, said in a research note published Monday. “Investment is 4 percent weaker, inflation 1.5 percent higher, consumption is 1.7 percent lower and the REER (the real effective exchange rate) is 12 percent more depreciated,” the report added." Taken from CBS website 2018 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Did economists predict the crash? Nope In fact they vehemently said that it couldn't happen I rarely reply to the trolls. But I will suggest that if you make a point like this. You need to say what crash you're talking about, otherwise it's abstract and no one can reply. I'm a troll because I keep pointing out the flaws in your arguments or proving you wrong? Whatever 2008 No, you troll because you ignore any points made and are just trying to find some kind of "win" via semantics. So in 2007 Lehman brothers collapsed. And you're suggesting that because most economists didn't predict this, (which how could they, it was such a specific circumstance), that all economics is now false? If so, I would suggest that this is an extremely weak argument. So far they predicted that Brexit would be bad for the economy, and they have been right. £200 billion cost in 2020 alone, and we were still able to avail of the EU market as we had been. To summarise. All predictions saying Brexit will be a negative. All evidence suggests it will be negative, everything that's happened so far has been negative. Some people on a swingers forum think that Brexit is great, yet have no information to back this up. How has Brexit been bad for the economy? We didn't leave the EU until January, the covid crisis struck in March and we are still tied to EU rules until the new year. If you make that statement 2 or 3 years from now then it might hold some validity "The other chap replied. It's cost approx £200 billion so far, and we still have access to the market. If you're unwilling to acknowledge reality then any form of discussion is pointless. Have a good day. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just the teensy-weensy thing of keeping the peace in Europe for 70 years. " Doesnt count apparently | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just the teensy-weensy thing of keeping the peace in Europe for 70 years. " and not nato then ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Are America not part of nato?" yes ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just the teensy-weensy thing of keeping the peace in Europe for 70 years. " Another one who is ignoring the Kosovo war in Europe.! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have got to wonder where some people get this rather bizarre hatred of the eu from. Surely it cant all come from the mail et al?" Are you really that stupid Lionel? You stated earlier there has been no major armed conflicts in Europe. Totally ignoring the Yugoslav wars. Ten-day war 1991. Croatian war of Independence 1991-1995. Bosnian war 1992-1995. Kosovo War 1998-1999 Insurgency in the Presevo Valley 1999-2001 Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia 2001. All this has happened in Europe and often described as Europe's deadliest conflicts since W W II. This is FACT no some made up bs which you like posting. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have got to wonder where some people get this rather bizarre hatred of the eu from. Surely it cant all come from the mail et al?" where is the hatred ffs how is voting to leave the EU hatred ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have got to wonder where some people get this rather bizarre hatred of the eu from. Surely it cant all come from the mail et al?where is the hatred ffs how is voting to leave the EU hatred ?" You do really need to read what I actually said No where did I say ..if you voted leave did you hate the eu However there are clearly people on here who,even when faced with facts,refuse to acknowledge anything positive it has achieved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have got to wonder where some people get this rather bizarre hatred of the eu from. Surely it cant all come from the mail et al? Are you really that stupid Lionel? You stated earlier there has been no major armed conflicts in Europe. Totally ignoring the Yugoslav wars. Ten-day war 1991. Croatian war of Independence 1991-1995. Bosnian war 1992-1995. Kosovo War 1998-1999 Insurgency in the Presevo Valley 1999-2001 Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia 2001. All this has happened in Europe and often described as Europe's deadliest conflicts since W W II. This is FACT no some made up bs which you like posting. " How many of them.are in eu again? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have got to wonder where some people get this rather bizarre hatred of the eu from. Surely it cant all come from the mail et al?where is the hatred ffs how is voting to leave the EU hatred ? You do really need to read what I actually said No where did I say ..if you voted leave did you hate the eu However there are clearly people on here who,even when faced with facts,refuse to acknowledge anything positive it has achieved. " so not acknowledging anything positive is hatred | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant " Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded" I don't recall.me saying I was an expert in European affairs but top marks for deflection | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded" I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU...." Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. " Can I ask again? So why are there still military constraints on Germany? Could that have helped to keep the peace? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. " You simply have a lack of education or are so deluded to understand what you have written yourself and tried woefully to defend was written by another poster. You have claimed the EU is the reason there have been no major armed conflicts in Europe for the 1st time in centuries. Which is clearly wrong. But rather than admitting you are wrong you change your tune and say members of the EU. Here is a FACT for you Lionel. The EU is not Europe. #FACT | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You have got to wonder where some people get this rather bizarre hatred of the eu from. Surely it cant all come from the mail et al? Are you really that stupid Lionel? You stated earlier there has been no major armed conflicts in Europe. Totally ignoring the Yugoslav wars. Ten-day war 1991. Croatian war of Independence 1991-1995. Bosnian war 1992-1995. Kosovo War 1998-1999 Insurgency in the Presevo Valley 1999-2001 Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia 2001. All this has happened in Europe and often described as Europe's deadliest conflicts since W W II. This is FACT no some made up bs which you like posting. " Think they mostly come under the realm of Civil war and the conflict in Kosovo was driven by Serbs trying to crush Muslims. The previous country of Yugoslavia forced together by a rather nasty general disintegrated but the conflicts weren’t resolved fully based on ethnic grounds and historical borders. So really not one country attacking another but a country at war with itself. Much like Wales wanting to kick the shit out of the English. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. You simply have a lack of education or are so deluded to understand what you have written yourself and tried woefully to defend was written by another poster. You have claimed the EU is the reason there have been no major armed conflicts in Europe for the 1st time in centuries. Which is clearly wrong. But rather than admitting you are wrong you change your tune and say members of the EU. Here is a FACT for you Lionel. The EU is not Europe. #FACT" From the best war starter in recent years. A quote from Angela Merkel. “Germany owes much to European unity. The EU is a guarantor of peace, freedom and prosperity. For my generation of Germans – but also for the younger generation without the experience of war and dictatorship – that fact is highly valued. Apart from the gift of peace, the European single market and the euro have contributed to Europe's status as the world's largest economic area. Many people all over the world envy the high standard of living we enjoy.” She seems to think it’s stopped wars and my money is she’s smarter than 99% of this board. Here a fact for you “Studying the impact of the 2016 Brexit referendum on UK foreign direct investment. Using the synthetic control method to construct appropriate counterfactuals, we show that by March 2019 the Leave vote had led to a 17% increase in the number of UK outward investment transactions in the remaining EU27 member states, whereas transactions in non-EU OECD countries were unaffected. These results support the hypothesis that UK companies have been setting up European subsidiaries to retain access to the EU market after Brexit. At the same time, we find that the number of EU27 investment projects in the UK has declined by around 9%, illustrating that being a smaller economy than the EU leaves the UK more exposed to the costs of economic disintegration.” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? " Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters." Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good." The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts." It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. You simply have a lack of education or are so deluded to understand what you have written yourself and tried woefully to defend was written by another poster. You have claimed the EU is the reason there have been no major armed conflicts in Europe for the 1st time in centuries. Which is clearly wrong. But rather than admitting you are wrong you change your tune and say members of the EU. Here is a FACT for you Lionel. The EU is not Europe. #FACT From the best war starter in recent years. A quote from Angela Merkel. “Germany owes much to European unity. The EU is a guarantor of peace, freedom and prosperity. For my generation of Germans – but also for the younger generation without the experience of war and dictatorship – that fact is highly valued. Apart from the gift of peace, the European single market and the euro have contributed to Europe's status as the world's largest economic area. Many people all over the world envy the high standard of living we enjoy.” She seems to think it’s stopped wars and my money is she’s smarter than 99% of this board. Here a fact for you “Studying the impact of the 2016 Brexit referendum on UK foreign direct investment. Using the synthetic control method to construct appropriate counterfactuals, we show that by March 2019 the Leave vote had led to a 17% increase in the number of UK outward investment transactions in the remaining EU27 member states, whereas transactions in non-EU OECD countries were unaffected. These results support the hypothesis that UK companies have been setting up European subsidiaries to retain access to the EU market after Brexit. At the same time, we find that the number of EU27 investment projects in the UK has declined by around 9%, illustrating that being a smaller economy than the EU leaves the UK more exposed to the costs of economic disintegration.”" I thought you were a businessman? Of course they are going to set up subsidiaries inside the EU. Don't businesses from every other non EU country do the same thing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? " No, the £200 billion you keep erroneously quoting was the Bloomberg estimate for the total of the last four years, please concentrate. The rest of us? You mean the majority of the population, which includes quite a few remain voters who have changed their mind? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? No, the £200 billion you keep erroneously quoting was the Bloomberg estimate for the total of the last four years, please concentrate. The rest of us? You mean the majority of the population, which includes quite a few remain voters who have changed their mind? " Okay I'll try again. Considering there are no positive forecasts for Brexit. What makes you convinced that it's a good idea? What do you think that some people are missing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? No, the £200 billion you keep erroneously quoting was the Bloomberg estimate for the total of the last four years, please concentrate. The rest of us? You mean the majority of the population, which includes quite a few remain voters who have changed their mind? Okay I'll try again. Considering there are no positive forecasts for Brexit. What makes you convinced that it's a good idea? What do you think that some people are missing?" Well seeing as you’ve repeatedly misquoted a figure by a factor of 4, proves everything I need to know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? No, the £200 billion you keep erroneously quoting was the Bloomberg estimate for the total of the last four years, please concentrate. The rest of us? You mean the majority of the population, which includes quite a few remain voters who have changed their mind? " You have any evidence that remain voters have changed their minds? Polls don't seem to suggest this at all, I'm guessing you don't believe in those either. And how was the 200bn figure debunked? the debunking was of the Total paid into the EU over the years which suspect was around 222bn. other studies in 2018 said the decision knocked 2.1% of GDP USB in 2018. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? No, the £200 billion you keep erroneously quoting was the Bloomberg estimate for the total of the last four years, please concentrate. The rest of us? You mean the majority of the population, which includes quite a few remain voters who have changed their mind? Okay I'll try again. Considering there are no positive forecasts for Brexit. What makes you convinced that it's a good idea? What do you think that some people are missing? Well seeing as you’ve repeatedly misquoted a figure by a factor of 4, proves everything I need to know." https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? No, the £200 billion you keep erroneously quoting was the Bloomberg estimate for the total of the last four years, please concentrate. The rest of us? You mean the majority of the population, which includes quite a few remain voters who have changed their mind? Okay I'll try again. Considering there are no positive forecasts for Brexit. What makes you convinced that it's a good idea? What do you think that some people are missing? Well seeing as you’ve repeatedly misquoted a figure by a factor of 4, proves everything I need to know. https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/in-highsight-do-you-think-britain-was-right-or-wrong-to-vote-to-leave-the-eu/" https://whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-a-second-eu-referendum-were-held-today-how-would-you-vote/ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. It wasn't debunked. It was just shown to be an estimation. Of Brexit only cost £100 billion per a year, would that be a success? Okay so assuming all economists are 100% wrong. Let's ignore them for a moment. And I realise you want to ignore the vast array of positives for EU membership. You seem to be adamant that Brexit is a good idea. What do you think you see, that the rest of us don't? No, the £200 billion you keep erroneously quoting was the Bloomberg estimate for the total of the last four years, please concentrate. The rest of us? You mean the majority of the population, which includes quite a few remain voters who have changed their mind? Okay I'll try again. Considering there are no positive forecasts for Brexit. What makes you convinced that it's a good idea? What do you think that some people are missing? Well seeing as you’ve repeatedly misquoted a figure by a factor of 4, proves everything I need to know." So absolutely zero interest in actually discussing the issue then? Happy trolling. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remain should of put the 200 billion on the side of a bus lol" Well if it worked on people like you, maybe. Although we are talking about a 2019 study predicting to 2020 so it would have been made up! Not that that is an issue for some. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?"All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know. "
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
"Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know. "No seriously, outline the improvements! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january. "There’s a buzz going around that an EU FTA is coming this week | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january. "Mexico is a big deal too about 0.37% of trade thats going to make up for a lot. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remain should of put the 200 billion on the side of a bus lol Well if it worked on people like you, maybe. Although we are talking about a 2019 study predicting to 2020 so it would have been made up! Not that that is an issue for some." howay then what are people like me then ? And not the pc version I can take it lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january.
There’s a buzz going around that an EU FTA is coming this week "Wonder how much worse of that'll make use compared to being in the single market? if you add Mexico and Japan together that can offset 1% of the loss. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Remain should of put the 200 billion on the side of a bus lol Well if it worked on people like you, maybe. Although we are talking about a 2019 study predicting to 2020 so it would have been made up! Not that that is an issue for some.howay then what are people like me then ? And not the pc version I can take it lol" I can't message you, I'm not putting it on here as even if you can take it others won't. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. You simply have a lack of education or are so deluded to understand what you have written yourself and tried woefully to defend was written by another poster. You have claimed the EU is the reason there have been no major armed conflicts in Europe for the 1st time in centuries. Which is clearly wrong. But rather than admitting you are wrong you change your tune and say members of the EU. Here is a FACT for you Lionel. The EU is not Europe. #FACT From the best war starter in recent years. A quote from Angela Merkel. “Germany owes much to European unity. The EU is a guarantor of peace, freedom and prosperity. For my generation of Germans – but also for the younger generation without the experience of war and dictatorship – that fact is highly valued. Apart from the gift of peace, the European single market and the euro have contributed to Europe's status as the world's largest economic area. Many people all over the world envy the high standard of living we enjoy.” She seems to think it’s stopped wars and my money is she’s smarter than 99% of this board. Here a fact for you “Studying the impact of the 2016 Brexit referendum on UK foreign direct investment. Using the synthetic control method to construct appropriate counterfactuals, we show that by March 2019 the Leave vote had led to a 17% increase in the number of UK outward investment transactions in the remaining EU27 member states, whereas transactions in non-EU OECD countries were unaffected. These results support the hypothesis that UK companies have been setting up European subsidiaries to retain access to the EU market after Brexit. At the same time, we find that the number of EU27 investment projects in the UK has declined by around 9%, illustrating that being a smaller economy than the EU leaves the UK more exposed to the costs of economic disintegration.”" They are that brainwashed by the mail they cannot accept the eu cannot do anything positive. Its quite tragic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It never fails to amaze me that some British people cant be happy that their country is moving on and is signing trade deals. How sad are some people about losing a referendum?" I'm just saying it's not an improvement are you happy going backwards and the UK being poorer, it's not my fault people like you think just believing can improve things. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. Can I ask again? So why are there still military constraints on Germany? Could that have helped to keep the peace? " So If there were no constraints Germany would attack its economic allies? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january.
Mexico is a big deal too about 0.37% of trade thats going to make up for a lot."There’s that half empty glass again ....  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january.
Mexico is a big deal too about 0.37% of trade thats going to make up for a lot.
There’s that half empty glass again .... "I refer you to my comment about above! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january.
Mexico is a big deal too about 0.37% of trade thats going to make up for a lot.
There’s that half empty glass again ....
I refer you to my comment about above!"I doubt the eu are looking at it your way im sure the realization of the bigger picture is begining to set in,their cash cow or treasure island as some of them refer to us is moving on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january.
Mexico is a big deal too about 0.37% of trade thats going to make up for a lot.
There’s that half empty glass again ....
I refer you to my comment about above!I doubt the eu are looking at it your way im sure the realization of the bigger picture is begining to set in,their cash cow or treasure island as some of them refer to us is moving on."You add nothing, you just come out with something regurgitated for the Mail or Express you can't back up. You don't believe in Economics, you seem to think corruption is an EU issue when if you look closer to home it far worse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mexico deal today.
What improvements?All improvements with every country will take place next year as you well know.
- certainty for business
- a step closer to joining CPTPP
- negotiating a deeper and better agreement with Mexico next year
Yep 7 out of the 11 now The uk is applying to join in january.
Mexico is a big deal too about 0.37% of trade thats going to make up for a lot.
There’s that half empty glass again ....
I refer you to my comment about above!I doubt the eu are looking at it your way im sure the realization of the bigger picture is begining to set in,their cash cow or treasure island as some of them refer to us is moving on.
You add nothing, you just come out with something regurgitated for the Mail or Express you can't back up.
You don't believe in Economics, you seem to think corruption is an EU issue when if you look closer to home it far worse. "it's* | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. Can I ask again? So why are there still military constraints on Germany? Could that have helped to keep the peace? So If there were no constraints Germany would attack its economic allies?" They had the same economic allies between the wars and they do have form
So why do they still have military constraints? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. Can I ask again? So why are there still military constraints on Germany? Could that have helped to keep the peace? So If there were no constraints Germany would attack its economic allies? They had the same economic allies between the wars and they do have form
So why do they still have military constraints? "Probally because of what happened over 100 years ago? Seeing as you brexiteers see them as the big baddy, you would have thought they would have overturned it by now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. Can I ask again? So why are there still military constraints on Germany? Could that have helped to keep the peace? So If there were no constraints Germany would attack its economic allies? They had the same economic allies between the wars and they do have form
So why do they still have military constraints?
Probally because of what happened over 100 years ago?
Seeing as you brexiteers see them as the big baddy, you would have thought they would have overturned it by now."100? 
They can't overturn it because the rest of the EU, the UK and the USA still doesn't trust them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. Can I ask again? So why are there still military constraints on Germany? Could that have helped to keep the peace? So If there were no constraints Germany would attack its economic allies? They had the same economic allies between the wars and they do have form
So why do they still have military constraints?
Probally because of what happened over 100 years ago?
Seeing as you brexiteers see them as the big baddy, you would have thought they would have overturned it by now.
100?
They can't overturn it because the rest of the EU, the UK and the USA still doesn't trust them"And you know that for a fact? If germany were unhappy about it..do you not think they would have kicked up a stink And its completely irrelevant anyway. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It never fails to amaze me that some British people cant be happy that their country is moving on and is signing trade deals. How sad are some people about losing a referendum?" I guess once we achieve enough new trade deals that earns back what we've lost and without paying EU membership then Brexit will have been a success. How long that will take I dread to think. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The eu didnt prevent conflict between its member states as countries not in the EU were involved in conflicts. Brilliant Your lack of knowledge about Europe still amazes me especially as you consider yourself a europhile.! #Dumbfounded I don’t remember Yugoslavia (SFRY) being a member of the EU.... Its just a rather pitiful attempt at pedandtry. I'll put it simply for them. The eu has helped to remove the possibility of conflict as ,quite bluntly,why would you go to war with a country ,when your economy is quite reliant on them. I guarantee the usual suspects will not even cede this. You simply have a lack of education or are so deluded to understand what you have written yourself and tried woefully to defend was written by another poster. You have claimed the EU is the reason there have been no major armed conflicts in Europe for the 1st time in centuries. Which is clearly wrong. But rather than admitting you are wrong you change your tune and say members of the EU. Here is a FACT for you Lionel. The EU is not Europe. #FACT From the best war starter in recent years. A quote from Angela Merkel. “Germany owes much to European unity. The EU is a guarantor of peace, freedom and prosperity. For my generation of Germans – but also for the younger generation without the experience of war and dictatorship – that fact is highly valued. Apart from the gift of peace, the European single market and the euro have contributed to Europe's status as the world's largest economic area. Many people all over the world envy the high standard of living we enjoy.” She seems to think it’s stopped wars and my money is she’s smarter than 99% of this board. Here a fact for you “Studying the impact of the 2016 Brexit referendum on UK foreign direct investment. Using the synthetic control method to construct appropriate counterfactuals, we show that by March 2019 the Leave vote had led to a 17% increase in the number of UK outward investment transactions in the remaining EU27 member states, whereas transactions in non-EU OECD countries were unaffected. These results support the hypothesis that UK companies have been setting up European subsidiaries to retain access to the EU market after Brexit. At the same time, we find that the number of EU27 investment projects in the UK has declined by around 9%, illustrating that being a smaller economy than the EU leaves the UK more exposed to the costs of economic disintegration.” I thought you were a businessman? Of course they are going to set up subsidiaries inside the EU. Don't businesses from every other non EU country do the same thing? "This investment is linked to the “greenfield” statistics which since 2016 have shown outward investment in the U.K. dropping substantially. So basically money that would normally be invested in the U.K. is reducing. The above figures show jobs moving into Europe at the specific cost of U.K. jobs. We have done the same at the cost of U.K. jobs. So is that loss of investment and jobs a positive for employment opportunities in the U.K. in your opinion? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts." The a Bank of England put the figure at £40billion per year and higher is no deal. Can we trust their figures? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. The a Bank of England put the figure at £40billion per year and higher is no deal. Can we trust their figures? " You admit the £200 billion figure is complete bunkum then ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. The a Bank of England put the figure at £40billion per year and higher is no deal. Can we trust their figures? " From 2019: “.....the Bank’s record for forecasting is pretty lousy. The past year has been no exception. What has caught my eye is just how over-optimistic it was about Euro area growth a year ago. In its inflation forecast in February 2018 the Bank foresaw GDP growth in the Eurozone over 2018 running at 0.75 per cent per quarter. In the event, growth slowed dramatically to 0.4 per cent in the first two quarters and to 0.2 per cent in the second two quarters. The truth is, if we do end up with growth this year of 1.2 per cent, that will be quite a turn-up for the books compared with the prophecies Bank of England Governor Mark Carney made in the run-up to the 2016 referendum. A month before the referendum result, he suggested that the consequences of a vote for Brexit 'could include a technical recession'. We are still waiting for one.“ Mark Carneys “forward guidance” has become notorious in the city for being the exact opposite of what actually happens. So no, I wouldn’t trust them to run a whelk stall. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. The a Bank of England put the figure at £40billion per year and higher is no deal. Can we trust their figures? You admit the £200 billion figure is complete bunkum then ? " I’ve never claimed £200Billion on anything so not my question. But £40Billion a year is fact. The government leave the Bank of England to set interest rates as they have the best view of the economy’s real true figures. I like to think we can trust them over the daily Mail. Compared to EU membership of net £8- 9Billion, membership looks a bargain. So if nothing gets any worse we will be out by £310 Billion in trade alone over the next 10 years on top of the £40 billion per year so far. (If no deal it will be worse according to the bank!) These figures does not include the physical costs involved (Billions) just the losses on trade so far. Trade could rise or fall so let’s hope it rises or that number is going to get very nasty for the tax payers in the U.K. We are going to need some fantastic non EU trade deals to get that back! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. The main issue is that virtually every reason leavers say we're better off out of the EU is and has been demonstrated to be incorrect over and over again. Leavers keep on stating the same incorrect information and lies or only use part of the story to make a point but that totally falls apart when people point out the rest of the information needs to be taken into account. Prime example is... We pay more into the EU than we get out of it so we're better off out. That statement that is still rife that only uses the part of information that suits leavers agenda. This has been painstakingly explained thousands of times why it's so wrong to ignore the economic benefits of zero tarrifs on trade with 600 million people membership gave the UK. Now that doesn’t suit the leave agenda line because it nullifies their argument that there's no economic benefit. They only want to use how much we pay into The EU vs what they give us back and that's where they draw the line in their argument,hence only using part of the information. Same goes for the getting dragged kicking and screaming into an "EU Army" against our will. Same goes for WTO rules and paying tarrifs is so much better than FTA's Same goes for the error in understanding how the UK government had mechanisms to control freedom of movement that they didn't opt to use. So I'm not surprised that some people lose patience with leavers and say things like leavers are thick or didn't know what they voted for when all the facts / truth are so easy to find yet leave voters still use the same incorrect information or lies to back up their decision. It's very much like arguing with Flat Earthers, many of the claims are so easily demonstrated to be wrong yet the claims are stood by with unwavering devotion. How can you demonstrate something that hasn't happened? Indeed, I did ask to be pointed at one economist with a long term accurate track record at forecasting. Deafening silence, yet we’re still being asked to listen to the doomsters. Is there anyone predicting a positive outcome? I understand some scepticism around the accuracy of economics forecasting. But when 100% of them say it's going to be bad. And that it's already cost the economy £200 billion. And there is zero positive news. It's not looking good. The £200 billion figure was from Bloomberg and was debunked via Fullfact.org in the previous thread. So no, if economists can’t even accurately state what has happened, I wouldn’t put any store in their future forecasts. The a Bank of England put the figure at £40billion per year and higher is no deal. Can we trust their figures? From 2019: “.....the Bank’s record for forecasting is pretty lousy. The past year has been no exception. What has caught my eye is just how over-optimistic it was about Euro area growth a year ago. In its inflation forecast in February 2018 the Bank foresaw GDP growth in the Eurozone over 2018 running at 0.75 per cent per quarter. In the event, growth slowed dramatically to 0.4 per cent in the first two quarters and to 0.2 per cent in the second two quarters. The truth is, if we do end up with growth this year of 1.2 per cent, that will be quite a turn-up for the books compared with the prophecies Bank of England Governor Mark Carney made in the run-up to the 2016 referendum. A month before the referendum result, he suggested that the consequences of a vote for Brexit 'could include a technical recession'. We are still waiting for one.“ Mark Carneys “forward guidance” has become notorious in the city for being the exact opposite of what actually happens. So no, I wouldn’t trust them to run a whelk stall." Copy and paste from? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Continued Any argument that is along the lines of 52% of the population is thick is pretty weak sauce. " 52% of the population??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
