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 |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019." Great news. 
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time. "Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders? "Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders?
Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that?"I'm asking for clarity on why he thinks the UK is the leader in battery technology when Tesla has just built the worlds largest battery array in Australia, it was 3 times bigger than the previous array, and was delivered on a guarantee of 100 days or its free. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders? Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that? I'm asking for clarity on why he thinks the UK is the leader in battery technology when Tesla has just built the worlds largest battery array in Australia, it was 3 times bigger than the previous array, and was delivered on a guarantee of 100 days or its free. " Ok, but started pull off-thread. What do you think to bmw's investment in the uk plant at a date past scheduled brexit? Are you happy about it? Does it give you any increased confidence in the uk's skills and abilities and their perception oversees? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders? Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that? I'm asking for clarity on why he thinks the UK is the leader in battery technology when Tesla has just built the worlds largest battery array in Australia, it was 3 times bigger than the previous array, and was delivered on a guarantee of 100 days or its free. Ok, but started pull off-thread. What do you think to bmw's investment in the uk plant at a date past scheduled brexit? Are you happy about it? Does it give you any increased confidence in the uk's skills and abilities and their perception oversees?" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019." Goog good | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base." So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? " No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time. ""The electric bit - the drivetrain, which includes the motor, gearbox and battery pack - will be assembled in Germany, and fixed to the rest of the car in the factory." - BBC So the Germans do the smart, techie stuff while the Brits beat panels. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders?
Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that?
I'm asking for clarity on why he thinks the UK is the leader in battery technology when Tesla has just built the worlds largest battery array in Australia, it was 3 times bigger than the previous array, and was delivered on a guarantee of 100 days or its free. "Not only proposing a uk/USA trade deal to link to that, you're also proposing a uk/Australia trade deal to link to that too.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019." From the standpoint that the factory already makes minis and the production and supply lines are primarily in place it makes sense rather than building something anew The key indicator isn't going to be existing lines, it will be if any new models are built here | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019." Have you really looked into this or have you just rushed to post it as on the face of it, there is a pro Brexit angle? First up, anything that brings jobs and:or job security has to be applauded and welcomed. Let's just drill down a bit on the facts around the story. Mini body shells are already produced there and so an increase in electric mini's may result in an increase in production as long as the increase in electric production does not come at the cost of a decrease in petrol/diesel production. The Ofvord plant is a final assembly centre and as far as I can see, the new technology for the electric cars will be manufactured in Germany and shipped to Oxford. Currently, engines are transported from Hams Hall to Oxford and interestingly Hams Hall are providing the i8 hybrid engine. There is no word from BMW as to why Hams Hall will not be getting the extra investment when the skills and capability is there. So yes, good news but caveats exist. It would be far more practical to build the electric motors at Hans Hall and transport them over to Oxford - why are they not doing that? It is good that the assembly will continue at Oxford but whereas once most of the Mini was also prouduced in the UK, now a critical bit will be manufactured in Germany. It would have been sensational and very welcoming news had BMW announced the investment into Hams Hall to produce the new electric motor because that is new and it is the future. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Have you really looked into this or have you just rushed to post it as on the face of it, there is a pro Brexit angle? First up, anything that brings jobs and:or job security has to be applauded and welcomed. Let's just drill down a bit on the facts around the story. Mini body shells are already produced there and so an increase in electric mini's may result in an increase in production as long as the increase in electric production does not come at the cost of a decrease in petrol/diesel production. The Ofvord plant is a final assembly centre and as far as I can see, the new technology for the electric cars will be manufactured in Germany and shipped to Oxford. Currently, engines are transported from Hams Hall to Oxford and interestingly Hams Hall are providing the i8 hybrid engine. There is no word from BMW as to why Hams Hall will not be getting the extra investment when the skills and capability is there. So yes, good news but caveats exist. It would be far more practical to build the electric motors at Hans Hall and transport them over to Oxford - why are they not doing that? It is good that the assembly will continue at Oxford but whereas once most of the Mini was also prouduced in the UK, now a critical bit will be manufactured in Germany. It would have been sensational and very welcoming news had BMW announced the investment into Hams Hall to produce the new electric motor because that is new and it is the future." Given that the electric motor components are to be shipped from Germany to the uk after Brexit BMW must be pretty confident of getting a free trade deal with zero tariffs between the UK and the EU as Brexit negotiations develop then. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Have you really looked into this or have you just rushed to post it as on the face of it, there is a pro Brexit angle? First up, anything that brings jobs and:or job security has to be applauded and welcomed. Let's just drill down a bit on the facts around the story. Mini body shells are already produced there and so an increase in electric mini's may result in an increase in production as long as the increase in electric production does not come at the cost of a decrease in petrol/diesel production. The Ofvord plant is a final assembly centre and as far as I can see, the new technology for the electric cars will be manufactured in Germany and shipped to Oxford. Currently, engines are transported from Hams Hall to Oxford and interestingly Hams Hall are providing the i8 hybrid engine. There is no word from BMW as to why Hams Hall will not be getting the extra investment when the skills and capability is there. So yes, good news but caveats exist. It would be far more practical to build the electric motors at Hans Hall and transport them over to Oxford - why are they not doing that? It is good that the assembly will continue at Oxford but whereas once most of the Mini was also prouduced in the UK, now a critical bit will be manufactured in Germany. It would have been sensational and very welcoming news had BMW announced the investment into Hams Hall to produce the new electric motor because that is new and it is the future. Given that the electric motor components are to be shipped from Germany to the uk after Brexit BMW must be pretty confident of getting a free trade deal with zero tariffs between the UK and the EU as Brexit negotiations develop then. " That's the important part. A free flow of parts from Europe to the UK and then back again. BMW has also announced large investments in their factories in Holland and Germany. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? " In the BBC report; BMW said it had "neither sought nor received" any reassurances from the UK on post-Brexit trading arrangements. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? In the BBC report; BMW said it had "neither sought nor received" any reassurances from the UK on post-Brexit trading arrangements." Ill refer you to a quote from Centaur then made on a other thread. "So much for taking what the experts (and the Germans) say at face value to be true. It's not only the food industry that has seen scandal in the EU it's also the Germans motor car industry, VW well and truly pulled the wool over people's eyes on emissions from their vehicles." He says you cant believe them  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Have you really looked into this or have you just rushed to post it as on the face of it, there is a pro Brexit angle? First up, anything that brings jobs and:or job security has to be applauded and welcomed. Let's just drill down a bit on the facts around the story. Mini body shells are already produced there and so an increase in electric mini's may result in an increase in production as long as the increase in electric production does not come at the cost of a decrease in petrol/diesel production. The Ofvord plant is a final assembly centre and as far as I can see, the new technology for the electric cars will be manufactured in Germany and shipped to Oxford. Currently, engines are transported from Hams Hall to Oxford and interestingly Hams Hall are providing the i8 hybrid engine. There is no word from BMW as to why Hams Hall will not be getting the extra investment when the skills and capability is there. So yes, good news but caveats exist. It would be far more practical to build the electric motors at Hans Hall and transport them over to Oxford - why are they not doing that? It is good that the assembly will continue at Oxford but whereas once most of the Mini was also prouduced in the UK, now a critical bit will be manufactured in Germany. It would have been sensational and very welcoming news had BMW announced the investment into Hams Hall to produce the new electric motor because that is new and it is the future. Given that the electric motor components are to be shipped from Germany to the uk after Brexit BMW must be pretty confident of getting a free trade deal with zero tariffs between the UK and the EU as Brexit negotiations develop then. " If you read the story, this is just a common sense approach but BMW have not let themselves become exposed to Brexit risk. BMW have built a similar production plant in the Netherlands and any kind of trade restrictions on either the import of electrical motors or the export of finished vehicles and BMW can switch production to the NL at the drop of a hat. For now, we are in a status quo and so common sense dictates that things continue as normal and the slack created by the fall off of diesel vehicles is taken up by electric. As for an FTA agreement with the EU - how can you be so confident about that when the scale of any deal would mean that it will likely have to come under ECJ jurisdiction. That is supposed to be a red line isn't it? Minor partners don't set the jurisdiction terms with any agreement of any type. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" In the BBC report; BMW said it had "neither sought nor received" any reassurances from the UK on post-Brexit trading arrangements." They don't need to. If the Brexit trading terms are not what BMW want they will simply switch production to the Netherlands. They have just built an identically suited factory to Oxford in Holland for just such an eventuality. Oxford will probably end up serving the rest of its useful life producing petrol engined Mini's if BMW pulls the plug on electric production. All hypothetical as yet because we don't yet know what the UK/EU deal will be. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Have you really looked into this or have you just rushed to post it as on the face of it, there is a pro Brexit angle? First up, anything that brings jobs and:or job security has to be applauded and welcomed. Let's just drill down a bit on the facts around the story. Mini body shells are already produced there and so an increase in electric mini's may result in an increase in production as long as the increase in electric production does not come at the cost of a decrease in petrol/diesel production. The Ofvord plant is a final assembly centre and as far as I can see, the new technology for the electric cars will be manufactured in Germany and shipped to Oxford. Currently, engines are transported from Hams Hall to Oxford and interestingly Hams Hall are providing the i8 hybrid engine. There is no word from BMW as to why Hams Hall will not be getting the extra investment when the skills and capability is there. So yes, good news but caveats exist. It would be far more practical to build the electric motors at Hans Hall and transport them over to Oxford - why are they not doing that? It is good that the assembly will continue at Oxford but whereas once most of the Mini was also prouduced in the UK, now a critical bit will be manufactured in Germany. It would have been sensational and very welcoming news had BMW announced the investment into Hams Hall to produce the new electric motor because that is new and it is the future. Given that the electric motor components are to be shipped from Germany to the uk after Brexit BMW must be pretty confident of getting a free trade deal with zero tariffs between the UK and the EU as Brexit negotiations develop then. If you read the story, this is just a common sense approach but BMW have not let themselves become exposed to Brexit risk. BMW have built a similar production plant in the Netherlands and any kind of trade restrictions on either the import of electrical motors or the export of finished vehicles and BMW can switch production to the NL at the drop of a hat. For now, we are in a status quo and so common sense dictates that things continue as normal and the slack created by the fall off of diesel vehicles is taken up by electric. As for an FTA agreement with the EU - how can you be so confident about that when the scale of any deal would mean that it will likely have to come under ECJ jurisdiction. That is supposed to be a red line isn't it? Minor partners don't set the jurisdiction terms with any agreement of any type." The lobbies in the EU have huge amount of influence what happens in the EU and the Germans motor car industry is the most powerful lobby group in the EU. The UK also happens to be the German motor cars industry biggest customer, that's why I'm confident there will be zero tariffs between the UK and the EU after Brexit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Have you really looked into this or have you just rushed to post it as on the face of it, there is a pro Brexit angle? First up, anything that brings jobs and:or job security has to be applauded and welcomed. Let's just drill down a bit on the facts around the story. Mini body shells are already produced there and so an increase in electric mini's may result in an increase in production as long as the increase in electric production does not come at the cost of a decrease in petrol/diesel production. The Ofvord plant is a final assembly centre and as far as I can see, the new technology for the electric cars will be manufactured in Germany and shipped to Oxford. Currently, engines are transported from Hams Hall to Oxford and interestingly Hams Hall are providing the i8 hybrid engine. There is no word from BMW as to why Hams Hall will not be getting the extra investment when the skills and capability is there. So yes, good news but caveats exist. It would be far more practical to build the electric motors at Hans Hall and transport them over to Oxford - why are they not doing that? It is good that the assembly will continue at Oxford but whereas once most of the Mini was also prouduced in the UK, now a critical bit will be manufactured in Germany. It would have been sensational and very welcoming news had BMW announced the investment into Hams Hall to produce the new electric motor because that is new and it is the future. Given that the electric motor components are to be shipped from Germany to the uk after Brexit BMW must be pretty confident of getting a free trade deal with zero tariffs between the UK and the EU as Brexit negotiations develop then. If you read the story, this is just a common sense approach but BMW have not let themselves become exposed to Brexit risk. BMW have built a similar production plant in the Netherlands and any kind of trade restrictions on either the import of electrical motors or the export of finished vehicles and BMW can switch production to the NL at the drop of a hat. For now, we are in a status quo and so common sense dictates that things continue as normal and the slack created by the fall off of diesel vehicles is taken up by electric. As for an FTA agreement with the EU - how can you be so confident about that when the scale of any deal would mean that it will likely have to come under ECJ jurisdiction. That is supposed to be a red line isn't it? Minor partners don't set the jurisdiction terms with any agreement of any type. The lobbies in the EU have huge amount of influence what happens in the EU and the Germans motor car industry is the most powerful lobby group in the EU. The UK also happens to be the German motor cars industry biggest customer, that's why I'm confident there will be zero tariffs between the UK and the EU after Brexit. " And happy with ECJ oversight of the resulting trade deal? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Some people just can't help being negative. All investment and job security is good "Correct. If bmw had announced it was being built in the netherlands, the whiner posters would have been jumping for joy. Since it is being built here, 'it's nothing special' . Enough said. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Some people just can't help being negative. All investment and job security is good
Correct. If bmw had announced it was being built in the netherlands, the whiner posters would have been jumping for joy. Since it is being built here, 'it's nothing special' . Enough said."If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated. No one has said that this is bad news and no-one would have celebrated job losses - that is simply not correct. Some posters have read a headline and assumed their own story to fit the headline. Others have read the story, researched the background and made informed comments about the bigger picture. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? " Or may be BMW doesn't believe that BrexSHit will ever happen. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? Or may be BMW doesn't believe that BrexSHit will ever happen. "Oh they do, but like most large Corporations and multi-nationals they have spent the last 12 months Brexit proofing themselves. The only people who will suffer any Brexit pain will be the ordinary British people who get carried along helplessly on the changing tide. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? In the BBC report; BMW said it had "neither sought nor received" any reassurances from the UK on post-Brexit trading arrangements. Ill refer you to a quote from Centaur then made on a other thread. "So much for taking what the experts (and the Germans) say at face value to be true. It's not only the food industry that has seen scandal in the EU it's also the Germans motor car industry, VW well and truly pulled the wool over people's eyes on emissions from their vehicles." He says you cant believe them "So now you're starting to believe what Centaur says.... Never thought we'd see the day that your holding him up as a beacon of Brexit Truth and Enlightenment..... Nor that you'd agree with him that you can't trust the Germans. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? In the BBC report; BMW said it had "neither sought nor received" any reassurances from the UK on post-Brexit trading arrangements. Ill refer you to a quote from Centaur then made on a other thread. "So much for taking what the experts (and the Germans) say at face value to be true. It's not only the food industry that has seen scandal in the EU it's also the Germans motor car industry, VW well and truly pulled the wool over people's eyes on emissions from their vehicles." He says you cant believe them
So now you're starting to believe what Centaur says.... Never thought we'd see the day that your holding him up as a beacon of Brexit Truth and Enlightenment.....
Nor that you'd agree with him that you can't trust the Germans. "The German car industry has more questions to answer yet. A report is due, on how they all operated an illegal cartel. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders?
Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that?
I'm asking for clarity on why he thinks the UK is the leader in battery technology when Tesla has just built the worlds largest battery array in Australia, it was 3 times bigger than the previous array, and was delivered on a guarantee of 100 days or its free. "No you are not. You are just trolling for trolling sake. He said Britain is "A" world leader not "THE" world leader. Thought you so called educated ones would know the difference. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders?
Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that?
I'm asking for clarity on why he thinks the UK is the leader in battery technology when Tesla has just built the worlds largest battery array in Australia, it was 3 times bigger than the previous array, and was delivered on a guarantee of 100 days or its free.
No you are not. You are just trolling for trolling sake.
He said Britain is "A" world leader not "THE" world leader.
Thought you so called educated ones would know the difference." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders? "Not when they are loosing tens of thousands on every car they make. It's a small scale one-man pet project.....but good luck to them also. American....not European. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Not when they are loosing tens of thousands on every car they make. It's a small scale one-man pet project.....but good luck to them also. American....not European." Small scale?! God, I'd hate to see what your definition of large scale is then. This is a guy who is dramatically changing both the automotive and the space industries. With significant knock on effects to energy production/management/use. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders?
Are you proposing uk-us trade deal to link in to that?
I'm asking for clarity on why he thinks the UK is the leader in battery technology when Tesla has just built the worlds largest battery array in Australia, it was 3 times bigger than the previous array, and was delivered on a guarantee of 100 days or its free.
No you are not. You are just trolling for trolling sake.
He said Britain is "A" world leader not "THE" world leader.
Thought you so called educated ones would know the difference."Yet the electric drivetrain is all being built in Germany  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. Great news.
And BMW know that Brexit is happening but still decided to stay manufacturing in the UK. It was on the news yesterday where the business secretary Greg Clark said that the UK is a world leader in battery technology and is getting large investments into improving battery technology for the future. He said the UK wants more manufacturing jobs and investment on battery technology and that's what we are getting. So makes sense really for BMW to manufacture electric cars here in the UK where battery technology is improving all the time.
Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders?
Not when they are loosing tens of thousands on every car they make. It's a small scale one-man pet project.....but good luck to them also. American....not European."You know Tesla's value has over taken Ford, right? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Correct. If bmw had announced it was being built in the netherlands, the whiner posters would have been jumping for joy. Since it is being built here, 'it's nothing special' . Enough said. If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated. No one has said that this is bad news and no-one would have celebrated job losses - that is simply not correct. Some posters have read a headline and assumed their own story to fit the headline. Others have read the story, researched the background and made informed comments about the bigger picture. " Actually, I dis-agree. Lots of posters in this forum would be running to the keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere. Any snippet of bad news is gleefully transmitted in here by 'some' . So boring and predictable, prejudiced comment, again - Remain supporters are intelligent informed individuals, everyone else are thick Sun readers. Pathetic. I personally know there will be ups and downs to the process and I'm not so fixated as you and others on painting a black and white picture, or scorning other peoples opinions. Anyway, I personally am pleased about the announcement. I'm sure there will be a bad news story along soon for you to tell us all. Bye. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Actually, I dis-agree. Lots of posters in this forum would be running to the keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere. Any snippet of bad news is gleefully transmitted in here by 'some' ." Well as leavers won't listen to any reasoned argument about Brexit. They won't listen to any facts about brexit, and they won't listen to any figures about Brexit.... how do we get them to understand the mess they have created and take some accountability for it other than to point out actual examples in the news of where it is going wrong to them? -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Actually, I dis-agree. Lots of posters in this forum would be running to the keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere. Any snippet of bad news is gleefully transmitted in here by 'some' . Well as leavers won't listen to any reasoned argument about Brexit. They won't listen to any facts about brexit, and they won't listen to any figures about Brexit.... how do we get them to understand the mess they have created and take some accountability for it other than to point out actual examples in the news of where it is going wrong to them? -Matt" So, are all 'leavers' the same, with the same thoughts and opinions?? I know of people who lump all people of the same race together as having the same characteristics. That is equally as stupid. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Correct. If bmw had announced it was being built in the netherlands, the whiner posters would have been jumping for joy. Since it is being built here, 'it's nothing special' . Enough said. If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated. No one has said that this is bad news and no-one would have celebrated job losses - that is simply not correct. Some posters have read a headline and assumed their own story to fit the headline. Others have read the story, researched the background and made informed comments about the bigger picture. Actually, I dis-agree. Lots of posters in this forum would be running to the keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere. Any snippet of bad news is gleefully transmitted in here by 'some' . So boring and predictable, prejudiced comment, again - Remain supporters are intelligent informed individuals, everyone else are thick Sun readers. Pathetic. I personally know there will be ups and downs to the process and I'm not so fixated as you and others on painting a black and white picture, or scorning other peoples opinions. Anyway, I personally am pleased about the announcement. I'm sure there will be a bad news story along soon for you to tell us all. Bye." everyone who has commented has said it's good news.. no one has mentioned a 'newspaper' or that people are thick.. what some have done have given a bit more depth to the actual story or is that not allowed in the new speak post truth nirvana we now live in? seems that we should all be waving the flag with jingoistic fervour about such good news and growth in the country but anyone saying excuse me the flag has been produced in China is some sort of traitor.. for the record its good news about any job growth.. no story is just a headline and we all will look into such things if we want to be objective but its blatantly obvious and sadly so that any such objective assessment has become a tool for one side to slag the other off with.. in case you missed it, job growth is good.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" no one has mentioned a 'newspaper' or that people are thick.. what some have done have given a bit more depth to the actual story or is that not allowed in the new speak post truth nirvana we now live in? " Well my comment was in answer to: "If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated." And you yourself have quickly begun talking about jingoistic flag waving, ability to read past a headline etc. You might believe the intelligent people have been overuled by swathes of uneducated jingoists. I don't. Generally both sets of voters did what they did with good intention and based on good information steered by personal experience. Luckily the attitudes shown by people in this forum isn't refective of the majority of the population, however they voted. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Wouldn't you say Tesla are the world leaders? Not when they are loosing tens of thousands on every car they make. It's a small scale one-man pet project.....but good luck to them also. American....not European." One-man pet project ? With 33,000 employees you call that a one-man pet project  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 . We were a bit frightened they'd bugger off elsewhere. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" no one has mentioned a 'newspaper' or that people are thick.. what some have done have given a bit more depth to the actual story or is that not allowed in the new speak post truth nirvana we now live in? Well my comment was in answer to: "If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated." And you yourself have quickly begun talking about jingoistic flag waving, ability to read past a headline etc. You might believe the intelligent people have been overuled by swathes of uneducated jingoists. I don't. Generally both sets of voters did what they did with good intention and based on good information steered by personal experience. Luckily the attitudes shown by people in this forum isn't refective of the majority of the population, however they voted." So you think it right that a headline, sound byte or meme iscall that is required to make an informed opinion???? Without even reading the story, you blindly posted that it was vote of confidence (or words to that effect) and another said that it was because we were world leaders in battery technology - again without reading the story. It is just normal and sensible to read articles before getting too excited about them because you can be sure that someone else will. The good news about this story is that BMW will be supplying the electric motors and ancillary drive train to Oxford so that drop off of production of diesel and petrol driven cars can be offset. That is not a vote of confidence in anything, it is BMW utilising its resources efficiently and in light of current trading conditions. The news would have been truly fantastic and unquestionably great for Brexit had BMW agreed to build the power train at Hams Hall. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Correct. If bmw had announced it was being built in the netherlands, the whiner posters would have been jumping for joy. Since it is being built here, 'it's nothing special' . Enough said. If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated. No one has said that this is bad news and no-one would have celebrated job losses - that is simply not correct. Some posters have read a headline and assumed their own story to fit the headline. Others have read the story, researched the background and made informed comments about the bigger picture. Actually, I dis-agree. Lots of posters in this forum would be running to the keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere. Any snippet of bad news is gleefully transmitted in here by 'some' . So boring and predictable, prejudiced comment, again - Remain supporters are intelligent informed individuals, everyone else are thick Sun readers. Pathetic. I personally know there will be ups and downs to the process and I'm not so fixated as you and others on painting a black and white picture, or scorning other peoples opinions. Anyway, I personally am pleased about the announcement. I'm sure there will be a bad news story along soon for you to tell us all. Bye." Do you think that the negative consequences of Brexit should be hidden from public view? Not reported on, not mentioned? Not discussed? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" no one has mentioned a 'newspaper' or that people are thick.. what some have done have given a bit more depth to the actual story or is that not allowed in the new speak post truth nirvana we now live in? Well my comment was in answer to: "If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated." And you yourself have quickly begun talking about jingoistic flag waving, ability to read past a headline etc. You might believe the intelligent people have been overuled by swathes of uneducated jingoists. I don't. Generally both sets of voters did what they did with good intention and based on good information steered by personal experience. Luckily the attitudes shown by people in this forum isn't refective of the majority of the population, however they voted. So you think it right that a headline, sound byte or meme iscall that is required to make an informed opinion???? Without even reading the story, you blindly posted that it was vote of confidence (or words to that effect) and another said that it was because we were world leaders in battery technology - again without reading the story. " Can you copy and paste the bit where I said it was a vote of confidence (or words to that effect) please? Why do you assume I blindly posted, just after reading a headline? Why assume only you have the intelligence to read the rest of the story. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I personally know there will be ups and downs to the process and I'm not so fixated as you and others on painting a black and white picture, or scorning other peoples opinions. Anyway, I personally am pleased about the announcement. I'm sure there will be a bad news story along soon for you to tell us all. Bye. Do you think that the negative consequences of Brexit should be hidden from public view? Not reported on, not mentioned? Not discussed?" This story is positive. Negative stories are reported and eagerly posted by you. If you had the intelligence you claim, and any confidence, you'd be able to discuss the pros AND cons. As it is you will only ever discuss negatives. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"CLCC how the hell is this news anyway negative ?" Never said it was. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I personally know there will be ups and downs to the process and I'm not so fixated as you and others on painting a black and white picture, or scorning other peoples opinions. Anyway, I personally am pleased about the announcement. I'm sure there will be a bad news story along soon for you to tell us all. Bye. Do you think that the negative consequences of Brexit should be hidden from public view? Not reported on, not mentioned? Not discussed? This story is positive. Negative stories are reported and eagerly posted by you. If you had the intelligence you claim, and any confidence, you'd be able to discuss the pros AND cons. As it is you will only ever discuss negatives." It seems that you think negative stories shouldn't be published. Why is that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" This story is positive. Negative stories are reported and eagerly posted by you. If you had the intelligence you claim, and any confidence, you'd be able to discuss the pros AND cons. As it is you will only ever discuss negatives. It seems that you think negative stories shouldn't be published. Why is that? " What an odd conclusion to draw, from a post saying both should be discussed! Why do you mostly just post questions? Is it because you don't have your own ideas? I do think all stories should be published and I would enjoy discussing them all, with someone capable of a balanced discussion (seems unlikely on here), but it is good to do with friends who have diverse opinions. If you read my post more carefully, I said you only appear interested in the negative ones, and only discuss the negative ones. Why is that? Do you think that allows a balanced judgement and decisions to be made? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" This story is positive. Negative stories are reported and eagerly posted by you. If you had the intelligence you claim, and any confidence, you'd be able to discuss the pros AND cons. As it is you will only ever discuss negatives. It seems that you think negative stories shouldn't be published. Why is that? What an odd conclusion to draw, from a post saying both should be discussed! Why do you mostly just post questions? Is it because you don't have your own ideas? I do think all stories should be published and I would enjoy discussing them all, with someone capable of a balanced discussion (seems unlikely on here), but it is good to do with friends who have diverse opinions. If you read my post more carefully, I said you only appear interested in the negative ones, and only discuss the negative ones. Why is that? Do you think that allows a balanced judgement and decisions to be made?" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. You also seem to be implying that I am the one person pointing out the negative consequences of Brexit. This is not the case. You said "lots of posters in this forum would be running to to keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere." That is an obviously negative comment, which reads quite clearly that you dont approve of such threads, and dont believe they should be posted. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. You also seem to be implying that I am the one person pointing out the negative consequences of Brexit. This is not the case. You said "lots of posters in this forum would be running to to keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere." That is an obviously negative comment, which reads quite clearly that you dont approve of such threads, and dont believe they should be posted. " Read your own reply, above. 'You seem to be implying I am the one person pointing out the negative consequences...' Yet next paragraph, you quote me saying 'LOTS of posters would be running to the keyboard....' Do you see the glaring error? Come on. I thought you were good at reading the whole story and analysing detail? You do post on lots of threads. But I don't recall you posting or making any positive statements about anything in this forum. That's the lack of balance to which I refer. You're not the only one. Lots of others do it too. There are negatives to Brexit and positives. I'm sensible and honest enough to see that. Most people in the country are too. Some, who are ultra dogmatic find it impossible to do so. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. You also seem to be implying that I am the one person pointing out the negative consequences of Brexit. This is not the case. You said "lots of posters in this forum would be running to to keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere." That is an obviously negative comment, which reads quite clearly that you dont approve of such threads, and dont believe they should be posted. Read your own reply, above. 'You seem to be implying I am the one person pointing out the negative consequences...' Yet next paragraph, you quote me saying 'LOTS of posters would be running to the keyboard....' Do you see the glaring error? Come on. I thought you were good at reading the whole story and analysing detail? You do post on lots of threads. But I don't recall you posting or making any positive statements about anything in this forum. That's the lack of balance to which I refer. You're not the only one. Lots of others do it too. There are negatives to Brexit and positives. I'm sensible and honest enough to see that. Most people in the country are too. Some, who are ultra dogmatic find it impossible to do so." You never post about the multiple and obvious negatives to Brexit. You're right, I dont post about positives, because I have yet to find a single one. Look at this thread, it's not a positive, it's simply the status quo seeming to continue. Maybe you can help me, what would you say as the 3 biggest positives to brexit that have been realised so far? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Correct. If bmw had announced it was being built in the netherlands, the whiner posters would have been jumping for joy. Since it is being built here, 'it's nothing special' . Enough said. If a person is incapable of reading past a sound byte or a headline then by definition, they are easily led and easily manipulated. No one has said that this is bad news and no-one would have celebrated job losses - that is simply not correct. Some posters have read a headline and assumed their own story to fit the headline. Others have read the story, researched the background and made informed comments about the bigger picture. Actually, I dis-agree. Lots of posters in this forum would be running to the keyboard as quick as their little legs would carry them, to bring the bad news, if the car was announced to be built elsewhere. Any snippet of bad news is gleefully transmitted in here by 'some' . So boring and predictable, prejudiced comment, again - Remain supporters are intelligent informed individuals, everyone else are thick Sun readers. Pathetic. I personally know there will be ups and downs to the process and I'm not so fixated as you and others on painting a black and white picture, or scorning other peoples opinions. Anyway, I personally am pleased about the announcement. I'm sure there will be a bad news story along soon for you to tell us all. Bye." Don't mention anything about black and white pictures, you'll be accused of racism next! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. " He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Maybe you can help me, what would you say as the 3 biggest positives to brexit that have been realised so far? " There's a picture on the bbc website to help visualise brexit. We havent left yet and won't have until 2019, so none have been realised. Don't be sucked in just by the Brexit headline. Read the detail too. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. " Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it!" You're having a really off day. You can normally twist words but these are making you look foolish. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! You're having a really off day. You can normally twist words but these are making you look foolish." Look, it's not rocket science, I asked you to name 3 positives that have so far been achieved, and you couldn't name one! So either name them, or admit there has been nothing positive as a result. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You're having a really off day. You can normally twist words but these are making you look foolish. Look, it's not rocket science, I asked you to name 3 positives that have so far been achieved, and you couldn't name one! So either name them, or admit there has been nothing positive as a result." We haven't left yet, how can anything have been achieved yet? I'd log off and come back on when you are less tired. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You're having a really off day. You can normally twist words but these are making you look foolish. Look, it's not rocket science, I asked you to name 3 positives that have so far been achieved, and you couldn't name one! So either name them, or admit there has been nothing positive as a result. We haven't left yet, how can anything have been achieved yet? I'd log off and come back on when you are less tired." You're right, we haven't left let. But we've already lost jobs. We've already lost growth. We've already seen less nurses registering. We have already seen our world influence decline. We have already seen our currently devalue. We have already seen borrowing increase. We have already seen inflation increase. And we haven't even left yet... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You're having a really off day. You can normally twist words but these are making you look foolish. Look, it's not rocket science, I asked you to name 3 positives that have so far been achieved, and you couldn't name one! So either name them, or admit there has been nothing positive as a result. We haven't left yet, how can anything have been achieved yet? I'd log off and come back on when you are less tired. You're right, we haven't left let. But we've already lost jobs. We've already lost growth. We've already seen less nurses registering. We have already seen our world influence decline. We have already seen our currently devalue. We have already seen borrowing increase. We have already seen inflation increase. And we haven't even left yet... "Different discussion. You made up that I said there were no positives, by poorly twisting my post. Nothing can be achieved until we have left. That is a fact plain to anyone, yourself included, if you had the ability to have an honest discussion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" All investment into the UK is good. I have never been worried about a lack of skills we have in this country, but this news doesn't make me think we have greater skills than I thought the country had yesterday. Equally I dont think it will change international opinion on the UK skills base. So you dont see it as anything special? It being from an eu manufacturer extending its commitments in the uk post brexit? No. Unfortunately only a handful of jobs are going to be created from this apparently. Also the electric drivetrain is to be built in Germany, so it seems to be nothing to do with us being world leaders as was suggested earlier by Centaur. It seems strange that a board member for BMW has met with the Business Secretary 4 times in the last 7 months and makes you wonder what kind of assurances have been made. “Defending the single market, a key European project, must be the priority for the European Union,” Dieter Kempf, president of the German Federation of Industries lobby group. “It is the responsibility of the British government to limit the damage on both sides of the Channel,” said Kempf. “Over the coming months, it will be extraordinarily difficult to avert negative effects on British businesses in particular.” Surely by now brexiters must be able to see that the german automotive is not coming to the rescue in Britain? Or may be BMW doesn't believe that BrexSHit will ever happen.
Oh they do, but like most large Corporations and multi-nationals they have spent the last 12 months Brexit proofing themselves.
The only people who will suffer any Brexit pain will be the ordinary British people who get carried along helplessly on the changing tide."Companies, Corporations and multinationals can't 'Brexit proof' themselves as you call it. If the production of the new mini moved from Oxford to the Netherlands as you suggest it may do, then BMW would still have to ship the completed cars into the UK from the Netherlands over the UK customs border into the UK to be sold to UK consumers for them to drive the cars on UK roads after Brexit. So either they assemble the cars here and ship the parts in or they assemble the cars somewhere else and ship the completed cars in, one way or the other the parts or the car will have to go through the UK customs border after Brexit. There is no way any foreign company can Brexit proof themselves if they want to sell their products into the UK market. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You're having a really off day. You can normally twist words but these are making you look foolish. Look, it's not rocket science, I asked you to name 3 positives that have so far been achieved, and you couldn't name one! So either name them, or admit there has been nothing positive as a result. We haven't left yet, how can anything have been achieved yet? I'd log off and come back on when you are less tired. You're right, we haven't left let. But we've already lost jobs. We've already lost growth. We've already seen less nurses registering. We have already seen our world influence decline. We have already seen our currently devalue. We have already seen borrowing increase. We have already seen inflation increase. And we haven't even left yet...
Different discussion. You made up that I said there were no positives, by poorly twisting my post. Nothing can be achieved until we have left. That is a fact plain to anyone, yourself included, if you had the ability to have an honest discussion."You haven't named any positives! You said NONE have been realised. So are there any positives so far? Any? Even one? No, according to you there are none. Of course anyone can join in though, if there is a positive, let's hear it. Brexit was supposedly going to be a fantastic business opportunity. Can anyone name a company that has publicly stated, "we weren't going to invest in the UK while they were in EU, but now they are leaving we are going to invest £XXX and employ XXX people"? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You're having a really off day. You can normally twist words but these are making you look foolish. Look, it's not rocket science, I asked you to name 3 positives that have so far been achieved, and you couldn't name one! So either name them, or admit there has been nothing positive as a result. We haven't left yet, how can anything have been achieved yet? I'd log off and come back on when you are less tired. You're right, we haven't left let. But we've already lost jobs. We've already lost growth. We've already seen less nurses registering. We have already seen our world influence decline. We have already seen our currently devalue. We have already seen borrowing increase. We have already seen inflation increase. And we haven't even left yet...
Different discussion. You made up that I said there were no positives, by poorly twisting my post. Nothing can be achieved until we have left. That is a fact plain to anyone, yourself included, if you had the ability to have an honest discussion.
You haven't named any positives! You said NONE have been realised. So are there any positives so far? Any? Even one? No, according to you there are none. Of course anyone can join in though, if there is a positive, let's hear it.
Brexit was supposedly going to be a fantastic business opportunity. Can anyone name a company that has publicly stated, "we weren't going to invest in the UK while they were in EU, but now they are leaving we are going to invest £XXX and employ XXX people"?
"You really are talking bollocks. We haven't left the EU yet. We can't sign any new trade deals until we have left the EU in 2019 so that is when the positives will start to come. You say jobs have been lost? You are talking in the region of 100 thousand or maybe a couple hundred thousand jobs lost but during the same period millions of new jobs have been created in the UK. You really have posted a lot of nonsense on this thread today. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You haven't named any positives! You said NONE have been realised. So are there any positives so far? Any? Even one? No, according to you there are none. Of course anyone can join in though, if there is a positive, let's hear it. Brexit was supposedly going to be a fantastic business opportunity. Can anyone name a company that has publicly stated, "we weren't going to invest in the UK while they were in EU, but now they are leaving we are going to invest £XXX and employ XXX people"? " This is mind numbingly tedious. What has been realised? Nothing. Nothing can be realised pre-2019. Have you noticed you are the only one persuing this silly train of thought? Cba tonight, you are too draining with this tedium. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You haven't named any positives! You said NONE have been realised. So are there any positives so far? Any? Even one? No, according to you there are none. Of course anyone can join in though, if there is a positive, let's hear it. Brexit was supposedly going to be a fantastic business opportunity. Can anyone name a company that has publicly stated, "we weren't going to invest in the UK while they were in EU, but now they are leaving we are going to invest £XXX and employ XXX people"? This is mind numbingly tedious. What has been realised? Nothing. Nothing can be realised pre-2019. Have you noticed you are the only one persuing this silly train of thought? Cba tonight, you are too draining with this tedium." So you just accept that the UK will just decline for years, not just until 2019, but for the years of transitional arrangements too? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Companies, Corporations and multinationals can't 'Brexit proof' themselves as you call it. If the production of the new mini moved from Oxford to the Netherlands as you suggest it may do, then BMW would still have to ship the completed cars into the UK from the Netherlands over the UK customs border into the UK to be sold to UK consumers for them to drive the cars on UK roads after Brexit. So either they assemble the cars here and ship the parts in or they assemble the cars somewhere else and ship the completed cars in, one way or the other the parts or the car will have to go through the UK customs border after Brexit. There is no way any foreign company can Brexit proof themselves if they want to sell their products into the UK market. " Perhaps you should think that through a little, especially if you take into account what BMW themselves said... "BMW has built up an alternative manufacturing base in the Netherlands amid concerns about Britain's suitability as an export hub after Brexit. BMW has warned about the damage of Brexit uncertainty, and in May chief executive Harald Krueger said the company had to remain flexible about production facilities." This is BMW preparing to Brexit proof themselves by moving non-UK domestic production outside of the UK if and when it needs to do so. As another poster has said - this is good news but what everyone is waiting for is the massive pro Brexit from any industrialist, manufacturer or multi-national saying that Brexit will be great for the UK and great for us and to that end this is us making a huge investment into the future. BMW could have done that by announcing an expansion of the Oxford plant instead of investing in the Netherlands, they could have done it by announcing that the new electric engines, batteries and components would be built in Birmingham. As the other poster has said, no one has yet come out with £billions between their teeth backing Britain outside of the EU. On the contrary, the country has slipped to the slowest growing economy in the G8 and even Greece is doing better than us. Why would this happen do we think? Perhaps the people that actually make things happen in commerce and industry are not particularly inspired by our future plans? Dunno - just a thought. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You haven't named any positives! You said NONE have been realised. So are there any positives so far? Any? Even one? No, according to you there are none. Of course anyone can join in though, if there is a positive, let's hear it. Brexit was supposedly going to be a fantastic business opportunity. Can anyone name a company that has publicly stated, "we weren't going to invest in the UK while they were in EU, but now they are leaving we are going to invest £XXX and employ XXX people"? This is mind numbingly tedious. What has been realised? Nothing. Nothing can be realised pre-2019. Have you noticed you are the only one persuing this silly train of thought? Cba tonight, you are too draining with this tedium. So you just accept that the UK will just decline for years, not just until 2019, but for the years of transitional arrangements too? " The UK is not declining though, we're still growing as an economy, even though the Project fear scaremongers said a vote to leave would lead to recession in 2017. There has been no recession and the UK economy is still in positive growth territory. Even though the IMF downgraded it's growth forecast for the UK this year the other day, the IMF forecast still puts the UK economy in positive growth territory. Where is the recession you and your cohorts predicted during the referendum campaign last year? It's hasn't happened, there is no recession. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it!" A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" You haven't named any positives! You said NONE have been realised. So are there any positives so far? Any? Even one? No, according to you there are none. Of course anyone can join in though, if there is a positive, let's hear it. Brexit was supposedly going to be a fantastic business opportunity. Can anyone name a company that has publicly stated, "we weren't going to invest in the UK while they were in EU, but now they are leaving we are going to invest £XXX and employ XXX people"? This is mind numbingly tedious. What has been realised? Nothing. Nothing can be realised pre-2019. Have you noticed you are the only one persuing this silly train of thought? Cba tonight, you are too draining with this tedium. So you just accept that the UK will just decline for years, not just until 2019, but for the years of transitional arrangements too? The UK is not declining though, we're still growing as an economy, even though the Project fear scaremongers said a vote to leave would lead to recession in 2017. There has been no recession and the UK economy is still in positive growth territory. Even though the IMF downgraded it's growth forecast for the UK this year the other day, the IMF forecast still puts the UK economy in positive growth territory. Where is the recession you and your cohorts predicted during the referendum campaign last year? It's hasn't happened, there is no recession. " Waiting for them to tell you that none of that has happened yet, because we haven't left yet....oh, the irony of that! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. " They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? " Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" .... As another poster has said - this is good news but what everyone is waiting for is the massive pro Brexit from any industrialist, manufacturer or multi-national saying that Brexit will be great for the UK and great for us and to that end this is us making a huge investment.. " Jaguar, 750 jobs at new powertrain development and manufacturing in Coventry announced in January. 5000 more jobs by them announced the other week. A massive designer, manufacturer and exporter, owned by Tata that could have located that anywhere but chose here. Just an example since the OP was about vehicle manufacturing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3." Employment up - Can you show me a press release or statement from even one company saying that they have hired BECAUSE of Brexit, and wouldn’t have otherwise? Unemployment down - see above House prices up - How has the vote to leave the EU affected the housing market so far? The referendum result appears to have contributed to a fall in the number of people moving home. UK housing transactions in the second half of 2016 were 9 per cent down on the same period in 2015, according to figures from HM Revenue & Customs. The listed estate agency group Countrywide says the vote “had an impact on confidence in the housing market”. When it comes to pricing, analysts say the main effect of the vote has been in London, which had previously been experiencing a house price boom. Hometrack says Brexit uncertainty has been “driving down house price growth in the capital, now at its lowest level since May 2013”. Financial Times March 29 2017 Exports up - Yes exports are up has the £ has crashed, however the UK is a net importer, so bad news for the UK. No recession - There hasn’t been a recession, but growth has slowed to a lower rate than even Greece. There wasn’t a forecast recession had we remained in the EU, so Brexit hasn’t averted a recession has it? No 30 Billion emergency budget - August 2016 saw £70bn of monetary policy measures including quantitive easing, that is more than DOUBLE the £30 billion you mention. So none of those are positives. Can anyone name any genuine positives? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3. Employment up - Can you show me a press release or statement from even one company saying that they have hired BECAUSE of Brexit, and wouldn’t have otherwise? Unemployment down - see above House prices up - How has the vote to leave the EU affected the housing market so far? The referendum result appears to have contributed to a fall in the number of people moving home. UK housing transactions in the second half of 2016 were 9 per cent down on the same period in 2015, according to figures from HM Revenue & Customs. The listed estate agency group Countrywide says the vote “had an impact on confidence in the housing market”. When it comes to pricing, analysts say the main effect of the vote has been in London, which had previously been experiencing a house price boom. Hometrack says Brexit uncertainty has been “driving down house price growth in the capital, now at its lowest level since May 2013”. Financial Times March 29 2017 Exports up - Yes exports are up has the £ has crashed, however the UK is a net importer, so bad news for the UK. No recession - There hasn’t been a recession, but growth has slowed to a lower rate than even Greece. There wasn’t a forecast recession had we remained in the EU, so Brexit hasn’t averted a recession has it? No 30 Billion emergency budget - August 2016 saw £70bn of monetary policy measures including quantitive easing, that is more than DOUBLE the £30 billion you mention. So none of those are positives. Can anyone name any genuine positives? "It doesn't rain that much in Britain as a direct result of the Referendum. Hence, we see more blue sky than before. Positive, init? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3. Employment up - Can you show me a press release or statement from even one company saying that they have hired BECAUSE of Brexit, and wouldn’t have otherwise? Unemployment down - see above House prices up - How has the vote to leave the EU affected the housing market so far? The referendum result appears to have contributed to a fall in the number of people moving home. UK housing transactions in the second half of 2016 were 9 per cent down on the same period in 2015, according to figures from HM Revenue & Customs. The listed estate agency group Countrywide says the vote “had an impact on confidence in the housing market”. When it comes to pricing, analysts say the main effect of the vote has been in London, which had previously been experiencing a house price boom. Hometrack says Brexit uncertainty has been “driving down house price growth in the capital, now at its lowest level since May 2013”. Financial Times March 29 2017 Exports up - Yes exports are up has the £ has crashed, however the UK is a net importer, so bad news for the UK. No recession - There hasn’t been a recession, but growth has slowed to a lower rate than even Greece. There wasn’t a forecast recession had we remained in the EU, so Brexit hasn’t averted a recession has it? No 30 Billion emergency budget - August 2016 saw £70bn of monetary policy measures including quantitive easing, that is more than DOUBLE the £30 billion you mention. So none of those are positives. Can anyone name any genuine positives? "Remain referendum predictions by the treasury.Treasury report to George Osborne published 23 May 2016. "Immediately following a vote to leave" Nowhere in the treasury report does it say upon leaving or following invoking article 50. "A vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy" "It would push our economy into a recession" "Increase in unemployment of 500,000" "GDP would be smaller by 3.6%" "House prices would fall between 10 and 18%" "Unemployment rate will increase by between 1.6 and 2.4%" Please show the figures to support these predictions. With regard to inflation, in The BoE letter to the chancellor of May 2015 - a year before the referendum- the governor of the Bank of England predicted "inflation will return to 2% within 2 years". So the BoE KNEW inflation would increase by mid 2017. In late 2015 / early 2016 the IMF reported that the pound was overvalued by up to 20%. The BoE agreed with this. Remain campaign predicted that a vote to leave would push fuel prices up by 18.7p per Litre. Hasn't happened. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3. Employment up - Can you show me a press release or statement from even one company saying that they have hired BECAUSE of Brexit, and wouldn’t have otherwise? Unemployment down - see above House prices up - How has the vote to leave the EU affected the housing market so far? The referendum result appears to have contributed to a fall in the number of people moving home. UK housing transactions in the second half of 2016 were 9 per cent down on the same period in 2015, according to figures from HM Revenue & Customs. The listed estate agency group Countrywide says the vote “had an impact on confidence in the housing market”. When it comes to pricing, analysts say the main effect of the vote has been in London, which had previously been experiencing a house price boom. Hometrack says Brexit uncertainty has been “driving down house price growth in the capital, now at its lowest level since May 2013”. Financial Times March 29 2017 Exports up - Yes exports are up has the £ has crashed, however the UK is a net importer, so bad news for the UK. No recession - There hasn’t been a recession, but growth has slowed to a lower rate than even Greece. There wasn’t a forecast recession had we remained in the EU, so Brexit hasn’t averted a recession has it? No 30 Billion emergency budget - August 2016 saw £70bn of monetary policy measures including quantitive easing, that is more than DOUBLE the £30 billion you mention. So none of those are positives. Can anyone name any genuine positives?
Remain referendum predictions by the treasury.Treasury report to George Osborne published 23 May 2016.
"Immediately following a vote to leave"
Nowhere in the treasury report does it say upon leaving or following invoking article 50.
"A vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy"
"It would push our economy into a recession"
"Increase in unemployment of 500,000"
"GDP would be smaller by 3.6%"
"House prices would fall between 10 and 18%"
"Unemployment rate will increase by between 1.6 and 2.4%"
Please show the figures to support these predictions.
With regard to inflation, in The BoE letter to the chancellor of May 2015 - a year before the referendum- the governor of the Bank of England predicted "inflation will return to 2% within 2 years". So the BoE KNEW inflation would increase by mid 2017.
In late 2015 / early 2016 the IMF reported that the pound was overvalued by up to 20%. The BoE agreed with this.
Remain campaign predicted that a vote to leave would push fuel prices up by 18.7p per Litre. Hasn't happened.
"So the positives, according to you and other Brexshitters, are that some of the predictions of some of the remainers didn't happen within the time frame it was said those things would happen? Absence of worsening of the situation is a good thing, right? I thought that the argument was that because of the Leave vote there are so many positive things flourishing all around us. Ultimate bliss!  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3. Employment up - Can you show me a press release or statement from even one company saying that they have hired BECAUSE of Brexit, and wouldn’t have otherwise? Unemployment down - see above House prices up - How has the vote to leave the EU affected the housing market so far? The referendum result appears to have contributed to a fall in the number of people moving home. UK housing transactions in the second half of 2016 were 9 per cent down on the same period in 2015, according to figures from HM Revenue & Customs. The listed estate agency group Countrywide says the vote “had an impact on confidence in the housing market”. When it comes to pricing, analysts say the main effect of the vote has been in London, which had previously been experiencing a house price boom. Hometrack says Brexit uncertainty has been “driving down house price growth in the capital, now at its lowest level since May 2013”. Financial Times March 29 2017 Exports up - Yes exports are up has the £ has crashed, however the UK is a net importer, so bad news for the UK. No recession - There hasn’t been a recession, but growth has slowed to a lower rate than even Greece. There wasn’t a forecast recession had we remained in the EU, so Brexit hasn’t averted a recession has it? No 30 Billion emergency budget - August 2016 saw £70bn of monetary policy measures including quantitive easing, that is more than DOUBLE the £30 billion you mention. So none of those are positives. Can anyone name any genuine positives?
Remain referendum predictions by the treasury.Treasury report to George Osborne published 23 May 2016.
"Immediately following a vote to leave"
Nowhere in the treasury report does it say upon leaving or following invoking article 50.
"A vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy"
"It would push our economy into a recession"
"Increase in unemployment of 500,000"
"GDP would be smaller by 3.6%"
"House prices would fall between 10 and 18%"
"Unemployment rate will increase by between 1.6 and 2.4%"
Please show the figures to support these predictions.
With regard to inflation, in The BoE letter to the chancellor of May 2015 - a year before the referendum- the governor of the Bank of England predicted "inflation will return to 2% within 2 years". So the BoE KNEW inflation would increase by mid 2017.
In late 2015 / early 2016 the IMF reported that the pound was overvalued by up to 20%. The BoE agreed with this.
Remain campaign predicted that a vote to leave would push fuel prices up by 18.7p per Litre. Hasn't happened.
So the positives, according to you and other Brexshitters, are that some of the predictions of some of the remainers didn't happen within the time frame it was said those things would happen?
Absence of worsening of the situation is a good thing, right?
I thought that the argument was that because of the Leave vote there are so many positive things flourishing all around us. Ultimate bliss! "It is the majority of predictions by the remain campaign were seen to be, and have been driven to be, lies. Those who voted leave saw them to be what they were - lies and scaremongering. Those who voted to remain believed them verbatim. Or are you saying that if we'd voted to remain there would never be another recession, fuel prices would have gone down, house prices would be rocketing, inflation would be close to zero or maybe even negative, ages would be increasing at a rate of knots, there would be less unemployment than there is now, more employment than now, investment would be more than now, BMW would have moved its electric drive plant to Coventry, GDP and growth would be higher than now? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3. Employment up - Can you show me a press release or statement from even one company saying that they have hired BECAUSE of Brexit, and wouldn’t have otherwise? Unemployment down - see above House prices up - How has the vote to leave the EU affected the housing market so far? The referendum result appears to have contributed to a fall in the number of people moving home. UK housing transactions in the second half of 2016 were 9 per cent down on the same period in 2015, according to figures from HM Revenue & Customs. The listed estate agency group Countrywide says the vote “had an impact on confidence in the housing market”. When it comes to pricing, analysts say the main effect of the vote has been in London, which had previously been experiencing a house price boom. Hometrack says Brexit uncertainty has been “driving down house price growth in the capital, now at its lowest level since May 2013”. Financial Times March 29 2017 Exports up - Yes exports are up has the £ has crashed, however the UK is a net importer, so bad news for the UK. No recession - There hasn’t been a recession, but growth has slowed to a lower rate than even Greece. There wasn’t a forecast recession had we remained in the EU, so Brexit hasn’t averted a recession has it? No 30 Billion emergency budget - August 2016 saw £70bn of monetary policy measures including quantitive easing, that is more than DOUBLE the £30 billion you mention. So none of those are positives. Can anyone name any genuine positives?
Remain referendum predictions by the treasury.Treasury report to George Osborne published 23 May 2016.
"Immediately following a vote to leave"
Nowhere in the treasury report does it say upon leaving or following invoking article 50.
"A vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy"
"It would push our economy into a recession"
"Increase in unemployment of 500,000"
"GDP would be smaller by 3.6%"
"House prices would fall between 10 and 18%"
"Unemployment rate will increase by between 1.6 and 2.4%"
Please show the figures to support these predictions.
With regard to inflation, in The BoE letter to the chancellor of May 2015 - a year before the referendum- the governor of the Bank of England predicted "inflation will return to 2% within 2 years". So the BoE KNEW inflation would increase by mid 2017.
In late 2015 / early 2016 the IMF reported that the pound was overvalued by up to 20%. The BoE agreed with this.
Remain campaign predicted that a vote to leave would push fuel prices up by 18.7p per Litre. Hasn't happened.
So the positives, according to you and other Brexshitters, are that some of the predictions of some of the remainers didn't happen within the time frame it was said those things would happen?
Absence of worsening of the situation is a good thing, right?
I thought that the argument was that because of the Leave vote there are so many positive things flourishing all around us. Ultimate bliss!
It is the majority of predictions by the remain campaign were seen to be, and have been driven to be, lies.
Those who voted leave saw them to be what they were - lies and scaremongering.
Those who voted to remain believed them verbatim.
Or are you saying that if we'd voted to remain there would never be another recession, fuel prices would have gone down, house prices would be rocketing, inflation would be close to zero or maybe even negative, ages would be increasing at a rate of knots, there would be less unemployment than there is now, more employment than now, investment would be more than now, BMW would have moved its electric drive plant to Coventry, GDP and growth would be higher than now?"Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else....... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3. Employment up - Can you show me a press release or statement from even one company saying that they have hired BECAUSE of Brexit, and wouldn’t have otherwise? Unemployment down - see above House prices up - How has the vote to leave the EU affected the housing market so far? The referendum result appears to have contributed to a fall in the number of people moving home. UK housing transactions in the second half of 2016 were 9 per cent down on the same period in 2015, according to figures from HM Revenue & Customs. The listed estate agency group Countrywide says the vote “had an impact on confidence in the housing market”. When it comes to pricing, analysts say the main effect of the vote has been in London, which had previously been experiencing a house price boom. Hometrack says Brexit uncertainty has been “driving down house price growth in the capital, now at its lowest level since May 2013”. Financial Times March 29 2017 Exports up - Yes exports are up has the £ has crashed, however the UK is a net importer, so bad news for the UK. No recession - There hasn’t been a recession, but growth has slowed to a lower rate than even Greece. There wasn’t a forecast recession had we remained in the EU, so Brexit hasn’t averted a recession has it? No 30 Billion emergency budget - August 2016 saw £70bn of monetary policy measures including quantitive easing, that is more than DOUBLE the £30 billion you mention. So none of those are positives. Can anyone name any genuine positives?
Remain referendum predictions by the treasury.Treasury report to George Osborne published 23 May 2016.
"Immediately following a vote to leave"
Nowhere in the treasury report does it say upon leaving or following invoking article 50.
"A vote to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to our economy"
"It would push our economy into a recession"
"Increase in unemployment of 500,000"
"GDP would be smaller by 3.6%"
"House prices would fall between 10 and 18%"
"Unemployment rate will increase by between 1.6 and 2.4%"
Please show the figures to support these predictions.
With regard to inflation, in The BoE letter to the chancellor of May 2015 - a year before the referendum- the governor of the Bank of England predicted "inflation will return to 2% within 2 years". So the BoE KNEW inflation would increase by mid 2017.
In late 2015 / early 2016 the IMF reported that the pound was overvalued by up to 20%. The BoE agreed with this.
Remain campaign predicted that a vote to leave would push fuel prices up by 18.7p per Litre. Hasn't happened.
So the positives, according to you and other Brexshitters, are that some of the predictions of some of the remainers didn't happen within the time frame it was said those things would happen?
Absence of worsening of the situation is a good thing, right?
I thought that the argument was that because of the Leave vote there are so many positive things flourishing all around us. Ultimate bliss!
It is the majority of predictions by the remain campaign were seen to be, and have been driven to be, lies.
Those who voted leave saw them to be what they were - lies and scaremongering.
Those who voted to remain believed them verbatim.
Or are you saying that if we'd voted to remain there would never be another recession, fuel prices would have gone down, house prices would be rocketing, inflation would be close to zero or maybe even negative, ages would be increasing at a rate of knots, there would be less unemployment than there is now, more employment than now, investment would be more than now, BMW would have moved its electric drive plant to Coventry, GDP and growth would be higher than now?
Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else......."And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued! So maybe that should be the starting point.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. " An increase in tourism to this country.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. " Foreign investment in Britain at it's highest since 2005. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else.......
And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued!
So maybe that should be the starting point...."The difference between the 1st and the 2nd statement is that the 1st statement whether you like it or not is a statement of fact The 2nd is a hypothetical...... so the first CAN be used as a used as a starting point, the 2nd can't I know you don't like the answer if it doesn't suit the narrative, but if you are talking about cause and effect, then please stick to truth (the first) rather than assumptions (the second) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. Foreign investment in Britain at it's highest since 2005." Good example, would you mind giving us the source? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019." The car yes, but currently (no pun intended) we will need to increase and replace the old power stations to supply the lecky. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. Foreign investment in Britain at it's highest since 2005." FDI are usually decided up to 3 years in advance so those figures are based on decisions made before there was even serious talk of Brexit. Investors who think the UK will be worse to invest over the coming years as a place to invest has increased from 8% to 31%. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. " It's going to become worse than expected after we have exited, I mean Brexshitted . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. Foreign investment in Britain at it's highest since 2005." 
Brexshit Bullshit!
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else.......
And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued!
So maybe that should be the starting point...."So we needed a seismic event like Brexshit Leave Vote to bring £ to it's true value? Otherwise, we would still be carrying our overvalued pounds in our pockets, pitty us! What a weird logic! But no surprise, if you believed that 350mln would be saved and pumped into NHS, the same NHS that was going to be privatised, then you will believe anything... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. An increase in tourism to this country. "A tiny increase. But a huge increase in the cost of living. Real wages lower than in 2008. Almost 10years later. What a progress! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. Foreign investment in Britain at it's highest since 2005. Good example, would you mind giving us the source? " Reported in the telegraph end April this year, about an OECD report about foreign investment across the world. In a vote of confidence in Brexit Britain, UK FDI inflows soared to $253.7bn (£197bn) in 2016, up from £33bn the previous year, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). This represents the highest level of inflows since 2005. The figures also showed the UK drove the bulk of the 17pc increase in FDI inflows to the European Union. Britain also climbed above Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands and France to become the top destination for inward FDI across Europe and second only to the US in the OECD club of 35 rich economies. Maria Borga, senior statistician at the OECD’s investment division, said the sharp increase was a sign of “confidence in the economy”. While she said the fall in the value of the pound was likely to have been a factor behind the increase in investment, she said Britain’s underlying appeal also played a role. “The data show the UK remains attractive,” said Ms Borga. “The impact of the exchange rate cuts both ways because on the one hand it makes it cheaper for companies to buy, but on the other hand the earnings that they make there are worth less when they come back [in the local currency]. "So it could be an indication that [buyers] think that sterling will recover in the future, in which case you’re buying cheap but hoping that the earnings that you’ll get in the future will be worth more.” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
""Its not as bad as it could have been" is not a positive. Its a negative. I asked for you to name a positive. A good thing that has happened as a direct result of the referendum. Foreign investment in Britain at it's highest since 2005. Good example, would you mind giving us the source? Reported in the telegraph end April this year, about an OECD report about foreign investment across the world. In a vote of confidence in Brexit Britain, UK FDI inflows soared to $253.7bn (£197bn) in 2016, up from £33bn the previous year, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). This represents the highest level of inflows since 2005. The figures also showed the UK drove the bulk of the 17pc increase in FDI inflows to the European Union. Britain also climbed above Ireland, Switzerland, the Netherlands and France to become the top destination for inward FDI across Europe and second only to the US in the OECD club of 35 rich economies. Maria Borga, senior statistician at the OECD’s investment division, said the sharp increase was a sign of “confidence in the economy”. While she said the fall in the value of the pound was likely to have been a factor behind the increase in investment, she said Britain’s underlying appeal also played a role. “The data show the UK remains attractive,” said Ms Borga. “The impact of the exchange rate cuts both ways because on the one hand it makes it cheaper for companies to buy, but on the other hand the earnings that they make there are worth less when they come back [in the local currency]. "So it could be an indication that [buyers] think that sterling will recover in the future, in which case you’re buying cheap but hoping that the earnings that you’ll get in the future will be worth more.” " So none of that investment was actually because of brexit, it was driven by currency speculation over the £ that Brexit crashed. That's not the kind of long term investment that is good for the country. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else.......
And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued!
So maybe that should be the starting point....
The difference between the 1st and the 2nd statement is that the 1st statement whether you like it or not is a statement of fact
The 2nd is a hypothetical...... so the first CAN be used as a used as a starting point, the 2nd can't
I know you don't like the answer if it doesn't suit the narrative, but if you are talking about cause and effect, then please stick to truth (the first) rather than assumptions (the second)"And all the remain campaign's predictions were based on assumptions, what-ifs, maybes and perhaps. No recession - fact Unemployment down not up- fact Employment up not down - fact House prices up not down - fact GDP positive not negative - fact But then again, why let facts get in the way of your narrative. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else.......
And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued!
So maybe that should be the starting point....
The difference between the 1st and the 2nd statement is that the 1st statement whether you like it or not is a statement of fact
The 2nd is a hypothetical...... so the first CAN be used as a used as a starting point, the 2nd can't
I know you don't like the answer if it doesn't suit the narrative, but if you are talking about cause and effect, then please stick to truth (the first) rather than assumptions (the second)
And all the remain campaign's predictions were based on assumptions, what-ifs, maybes and perhaps.
No recession - fact
Unemployment down not up- fact
Employment up not down - fact
House prices up not down - fact
GDP positive not negative - fact
But then again, why let facts get in the way of your narrative."I admire your optimism and your ability to spin the look of a turd into a gold bar. I can only imagine that when the shit really hits the fan you will be there waving your Union Jack and praising the Dunkirk spirit. We did after all, stick it to the elites and the EU and really made them think didn't we? So it doesn't matter at all that the country is in the shit. We are British, we will survive. And we did it all because....... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And all the remain campaign's predictions were based on assumptions, what-ifs, maybes and perhaps. " Better having predictions and assumptions that don't materialise than Brexit bare faced lies IMO £350 Million a week for the NHS - look forward to that one. 75 MILLION Turkish WAITING to come here because they ARE joining the EU - MMMMMKAY But then again, why let facts get in the way of your narrative | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" And all the remain campaign's predictions were based on assumptions, what-ifs, maybes and perhaps. Better having predictions and assumptions that don't materialise than Brexit bare faced lies IMO £350 Million a week for the NHS - look forward to that one. 75 MILLION Turkish WAITING to come here because they ARE joining the EU - MMMMMKAY But then again, why let facts get in the way of your narrative " Third countries lining up to enter a trade deal with the UK. Lining up, my dick
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" I think it's clear that I comment on a range of threads, if you think I only comment on the negative threads, you must think that this thread is a negative story. He didn't say you only comment on negative threads. He said you always comment negatively on positive Brexit threads... Which you do. Maybe you could provide an example where you've said something positive about Brexit? Or maybe you'll just answer a question with a question, as always. Even the OP says there is nothing positive about Brexit, and they voted for it! A quote from the OP on thus thread...in response to one of your posts: "There are negatives to Brexit and positives." Please quote where they've said their is nothing positive about Brexit. And also where you've said something positive about Brexit....or are you just going to try and deflect again. They say it here: "What has been realised? Nothing" see, nothing positive has happened since the referendum. On this point I agree with the OP. I don't see any positives of brexit. But maybe you see it differently from the OP and I. What are your top three positives since the referendum? Employment up Unemployment down House prices up Exports up No recession No 30 Billion emergency budget Oops! There's 6 not 3." I'd add to that the list of 27 countries outside of the EU that now want trade deals with the UK as a direct result of Brexit. Oops! There's 33 now not 3! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else.......
And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued!
So maybe that should be the starting point....
The difference between the 1st and the 2nd statement is that the 1st statement whether you like it or not is a statement of fact
The 2nd is a hypothetical...... so the first CAN be used as a used as a starting point, the 2nd can't
I know you don't like the answer if it doesn't suit the narrative, but if you are talking about cause and effect, then please stick to truth (the first) rather than assumptions (the second)
And all the remain campaign's predictions were based on assumptions, what-ifs, maybes and perhaps.
No recession - fact
Unemployment down not up- fact
Employment up not down - fact
House prices up not down - fact
GDP positive not negative - fact
But then again, why let facts get in the way of your narrative."So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else.......
And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued!
So maybe that should be the starting point....
The difference between the 1st and the 2nd statement is that the 1st statement whether you like it or not is a statement of fact
The 2nd is a hypothetical...... so the first CAN be used as a used as a starting point, the 2nd can't
I know you don't like the answer if it doesn't suit the narrative, but if you are talking about cause and effect, then please stick to truth (the first) rather than assumptions (the second)
And all the remain campaign's predictions were based on assumptions, what-ifs, maybes and perhaps.
No recession - fact
Unemployment down not up- fact
Employment up not down - fact
House prices up not down - fact
GDP positive not negative - fact
But then again, why let facts get in the way of your narrative.
So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. "I just updated the number to 33 positives. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Well the pound would not have plummeted.... and maybe THAT should be the starting point in the chain that affects everything else.......
And months before the referendum the IMF, the BoE, etc were saying the pound was up to 20% overvalued!
So maybe that should be the starting point....
The difference between the 1st and the 2nd statement is that the 1st statement whether you like it or not is a statement of fact
The 2nd is a hypothetical...... so the first CAN be used as a used as a starting point, the 2nd can't
I know you don't like the answer if it doesn't suit the narrative, but if you are talking about cause and effect, then please stick to truth (the first) rather than assumptions (the second)
And all the remain campaign's predictions were based on assumptions, what-ifs, maybes and perhaps.
No recession - fact
Unemployment down not up- fact
Employment up not down - fact
House prices up not down - fact
GDP positive not negative - fact
But then again, why let facts get in the way of your narrative.
So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. "Do you think the remain campaign was good then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. " This is such a stupid twist on the thread. 'As a result of Brexit' ??? It hasn't happened, how can there be a result of it??? Difficult to see how you can deride peoples intelligence, then pursue arguments like this. Everyone knows that the benefits for leaving will be realised when we have left (post 2019). You know full well what the main issues in the campaign were. They all involve actually not being in it anymore. We are still a full member bound by all its costs and constraints. What people are saying is, the armagedon you predicted and constantly search for hasn't transpired. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Do you think the remain campaign was good then?" I don't think either campaign was anywhere near truthful, nevermind good. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. This is such a stupid twist on the thread. 'As a result of Brexit' ??? It hasn't happened, how can there be a result of it??? Difficult to see how you can deride peoples intelligence, then pursue arguments like this. Everyone knows that the benefits for leaving will be realised when we have left (post 2019). You know full well what the main issues in the campaign were. They all involve actually not being in it anymore. We are still a full member bound by all its costs and constraints. What people are saying is, the armagedon you predicted and constantly search for hasn't transpired." Ok what will the full benefits be for the normal hard working Joe in the UK thats something no one has ever explained...personal i think it will open more opportunities for the Torys to enforce more austerity upon us all....oh and maybe main claims that unemployment has gone down again with them forcing more people to take menial jobs so they dont get bounced off JSA....and further widen zero hours contacts without any fear of being taken to the ECJ... i cant see any benefits for me all i see is benefits for business and the rich getting richer | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. This is such a stupid twist on the thread. 'As a result of Brexit' ??? It hasn't happened, how can there be a result of it??? Difficult to see how you can deride peoples intelligence, then pursue arguments like this. Everyone knows that the benefits for leaving will be realised when we have left (post 2019). You know full well what the main issues in the campaign were. They all involve actually not being in it anymore. We are still a full member bound by all its costs and constraints. What people are saying is, the armagedon you predicted and constantly search for hasn't transpired." You have complained that people aren't posting positive stories. Yet you yourself are unable to find a single positive worth even mentioning, let alone worth starting a thread over. Plenty of bad things have already happened, that's why people post about them. With a year since the referendum, 2 years of negotiations, and up to 5 years of transition, that's going to be 8 years of negatives before we realise any positives. We have spent tens of billions already, we still have the billions in negotiations with the EU. How long before we realise that £350m a week? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. This is such a stupid twist on the thread. 'As a result of Brexit' ??? It hasn't happened, how can there be a result of it??? Difficult to see how you can deride peoples intelligence, then pursue arguments like this. Everyone knows that the benefits for leaving will be realised when we have left (post 2019). You know full well what the main issues in the campaign were. They all involve actually not being in it anymore. We are still a full member bound by all its costs and constraints. What people are saying is, the armagedon you predicted and constantly search for hasn't transpired. You have complained that people aren't posting positive stories. Yet you yourself are unable to find a single positive worth even mentioning, let alone worth starting a thread over. Plenty of bad things have already happened, that's why people post about them. With a year since the referendum, 2 years of negotiations, and up to 5 years of transition, that's going to be 8 years of negatives before we realise any positives. We have spent tens of billions already, we still have the billions in negotiations with the EU. How long before we realise that £350m a week? " Did you base your referendum vote on the "£350m a week"? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" So you think the remain campaign was shit, fine. But you are still unable to name us 3 positives that have occurred as a result of Brexit. This is such a stupid twist on the thread. 'As a result of Brexit' ??? It hasn't happened, how can there be a result of it??? Difficult to see how you can deride peoples intelligence, then pursue arguments like this. Everyone knows that the benefits for leaving will be realised when we have left (post 2019). You know full well what the main issues in the campaign were. They all involve actually not being in it anymore. We are still a full member bound by all its costs and constraints. What people are saying is, the armagedon you predicted and constantly search for hasn't transpired. You have complained that people aren't posting positive stories. Yet you yourself are unable to find a single positive worth even mentioning, let alone worth starting a thread over. Plenty of bad things have already happened, that's why people post about them. With a year since the referendum, 2 years of negotiations, and up to 5 years of transition, that's going to be 8 years of negatives before we realise any positives. We have spent tens of billions already, we still have the billions in negotiations with the EU. How long before we realise that £350m a week? Did you base your referendum vote on the "£350m a week"?" So what and how will i be any better off please try to explain...and i think the poster above was being sarcastic about the 350m | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it." I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually. "You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more. "Previous brexiters have said on this forum that it wouldn't even take two years from the referendum , now you are saying its going to be six years from the referendum. Most of those people have now quietly slipped away, no longer willing to embarrass themselves trying to defend it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more.
Previous brexiters have said on this forum that it wouldn't even take two years from the referendum , now you are saying its going to be six years from the referendum. Most of those people have now quietly slipped away, no longer willing to embarrass themselves trying to defend it."It's you who has embarrassed yourself on this thread talking about 5 years of transition just 2 hours ago when it was all over the news this morning the cabinet had agreed 3 years. Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition, and Philip Hammond said he wanted 5 years originally. It seems Hammond has had to concede the most ground as 3 year transition is 2 years away from his preferred 5. 3 years is only 1 year away from David Davis preferred 2 year transition. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually. "Jeez, it's like pulling teeth. There are no benefits realised yet, as we haven't left yet. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more.
Previous brexiters have said on this forum that it wouldn't even take two years from the referendum , now you are saying its going to be six years from the referendum. Most of those people have now quietly slipped away, no longer willing to embarrass themselves trying to defend it.
It's you who has embarrassed yourself on this thread talking about 5 years of transition just 2 hours ago when it was all over the news this morning the cabinet had agreed 3 years. Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition, and Philip Hammond said he wanted 5 years originally. It seems Hammond has had to concede the most ground as 3 year transition is 2 years away from his preferred 5. 3 years is only 1 year away from David Davis preferred 2 year transition. "Right, well we will see what happens wont we. I don't recall the Brexit campaigns calling for a transition period. I remember people saying we will be out before June 2018, now it 2022. Must feel like quite a slap in the face that it's going to be so many years later. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more.
Previous brexiters have said on this forum that it wouldn't even take two years from the referendum , now you are saying its going to be six years from the referendum. Most of those people have now quietly slipped away, no longer willing to embarrass themselves trying to defend it.
It's you who has embarrassed yourself on this thread talking about 5 years of transition just 2 hours ago when it was all over the news this morning the cabinet had agreed 3 years. Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition, and Philip Hammond said he wanted 5 years originally. It seems Hammond has had to concede the most ground as 3 year transition is 2 years away from his preferred 5. 3 years is only 1 year away from David Davis preferred 2 year transition. "And again all of the talk is about what May's Brexit team and spoken as if it will happen because by God, we are British and everyone has to do what we want. Transition or no transition, 2 years, 3 years or five years is all irrelevant and does nothing other than give people in this country the opportunity to crow over who is "winning" an argument. The EU holds the cards and they will decide. Sad as it sounds - the UK will have to ask permission first off to have a transition period and then negotiate its length. It surprises me that anyone still thinks that the EU will be in any way accommodating for anything because by the time the next round of Brexit talks start there will still have to be a decision made on accounts and citizens rights - with one-quarter of the two year window gone already. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
Jeez, it's like pulling teeth. There are no benefits realised yet, as we haven't left yet."So why are you complaining that no one is posting positive stories? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more.
Previous brexiters have said on this forum that it wouldn't even take two years from the referendum , now you are saying its going to be six years from the referendum. Most of those people have now quietly slipped away, no longer willing to embarrass themselves trying to defend it.
It's you who has embarrassed yourself on this thread talking about 5 years of transition just 2 hours ago when it was all over the news this morning the cabinet had agreed 3 years. Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition, and Philip Hammond said he wanted 5 years originally. It seems Hammond has had to concede the most ground as 3 year transition is 2 years away from his preferred 5. 3 years is only 1 year away from David Davis preferred 2 year transition.
And again all of the talk is about what May's Brexit team and spoken as if it will happen because by God, we are British and everyone has to do what we want.
Transition or no transition, 2 years, 3 years or five years is all irrelevant and does nothing other than give people in this country the opportunity to crow over who is "winning" an argument.
The EU holds the cards and they will decide. Sad as it sounds - the UK will have to ask permission first off to have a transition period and then negotiate its length. It surprises me that anyone still thinks that the EU will be in any way accommodating for anything because by the time the next round of Brexit talks start there will still have to be a decision made on accounts and citizens rights - with one-quarter of the two year window gone already." exactly | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more.
Previous brexiters have said on this forum that it wouldn't even take two years from the referendum , now you are saying its going to be six years from the referendum. Most of those people have now quietly slipped away, no longer willing to embarrass themselves trying to defend it.
It's you who has embarrassed yourself on this thread talking about 5 years of transition just 2 hours ago when it was all over the news this morning the cabinet had agreed 3 years. Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition, and Philip Hammond said he wanted 5 years originally. It seems Hammond has had to concede the most ground as 3 year transition is 2 years away from his preferred 5. 3 years is only 1 year away from David Davis preferred 2 year transition.
And again all of the talk is about what May's Brexit team and spoken as if it will happen because by God, we are British and everyone has to do what we want.
Transition or no transition, 2 years, 3 years or five years is all irrelevant and does nothing other than give people in this country the opportunity to crow over who is "winning" an argument.
The EU holds the cards and they will decide. Sad as it sounds - the UK will have to ask permission first off to have a transition period and then negotiate its length. It surprises me that anyone still thinks that the EU will be in any way accommodating for anything because by the time the next round of Brexit talks start there will still have to be a decision made on accounts and citizens rights - with one-quarter of the two year window gone already."Whilst time marches on, it's only fair to point out that it took the EU a month to acknowledge that we formally wanted to leave, and then nearly another two months for formal negotiations to start. So 1/8th of the available time was taken for the process to actually begin. And whilst the EU may want the bill sorting first, my understanding was that the UK was only given some sort of detailed breakdown during the last formal talks, a couple of weeks ago. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Whilst time marches on, it's only fair to point out that it took the EU a month to acknowledge that we formally wanted to leave, and then nearly another two months for formal negotiations to start. So 1/8th of the available time was taken for the process to actually begin. And whilst the EU may want the bill sorting first, my understanding was that the UK was only given some sort of detailed breakdown during the last formal talks, a couple of weeks ago." Come on... Really? You have to be either blind or a spinning Trumpesque not to see how unprepared is the British position. It is completely embarrassing. If we are to leave, then the Brexit team should have formulated a plan knowing exactly what all of the implications of leaving are - and just got on with it so as best prepare the country for day 1 outside the EU. This isn't happening because the Cabinet is divided, the Conservative Party is divided, Labour are divided - the whole fucking country is divided. I mean - what is the point in announcing an EU immigration impact study now?? This is going to be vital information that should have been available before the referendum was announced and now it is going to be finished just a few months before March 2019. I mean.. really what the absolute fuck. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Whilst time marches on, it's only fair to point out that it took the EU a month to acknowledge that we formally wanted to leave, and then nearly another two months for formal negotiations to start. So 1/8th of the available time was taken for the process to actually begin. And whilst the EU may want the bill sorting first, my understanding was that the UK was only given some sort of detailed breakdown during the last formal talks, a couple of weeks ago. Come on... Really? You have to be either blind or a spinning Trumpesque not to see how unprepared is the British position. It is completely embarrassing. If we are to leave, then the Brexit team should have formulated a plan knowing exactly what all of the implications of leaving are - and just got on with it so as best prepare the country for day 1 outside the EU. This isn't happening because the Cabinet is divided, the Conservative Party is divided, Labour are divided - the whole fucking country is divided. I mean - what is the point in announcing an EU immigration impact study now?? This is going to be vital information that should have been available before the referendum was announced and now it is going to be finished just a few months before March 2019. I mean.. really what the absolute fuck. " You can thank your Tory heroes Cameron and Osborne for that, they called the referendum without putting in any of these details beforehand and they also ran through the whole EU referendum campaign without any contingency plan in place for the event of a leave vote. The Tory Remainers Cameron and Osborne negligent and incompetent to the extreme. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Whilst time marches on, it's only fair to point out that it took the EU a month to acknowledge that we formally wanted to leave, and then nearly another two months for formal negotiations to start. So 1/8th of the available time was taken for the process to actually begin. And whilst the EU may want the bill sorting first, my understanding was that the UK was only given some sort of detailed breakdown during the last formal talks, a couple of weeks ago. Come on... Really? You have to be either blind or a spinning Trumpesque not to see how unprepared is the British position. It is completely embarrassing. If we are to leave, then the Brexit team should have formulated a plan knowing exactly what all of the implications of leaving are - and just got on with it so as best prepare the country for day 1 outside the EU. This isn't happening because the Cabinet is divided, the Conservative Party is divided, Labour are divided - the whole fucking country is divided. I mean - what is the point in announcing an EU immigration impact study now?? This is going to be vital information that should have been available before the referendum was announced and now it is going to be finished just a few months before March 2019. I mean.. really what the absolute fuck. " Joseph Muscat, President of the European Council, in an interview this week with the Dutch newspaper, Dr Volkskrant, said that the UK side was not underprepared. Just that the EU side was better prepared, as you would expect with the resources available to them. The current timeline is factually correct. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Whilst time marches on, it's only fair to point out that it took the EU a month to acknowledge that we formally wanted to leave, and then nearly another two months for formal negotiations to start. So 1/8th of the available time was taken for the process to actually begin. And whilst the EU may want the bill sorting first, my understanding was that the UK was only given some sort of detailed breakdown during the last formal talks, a couple of weeks ago. Come on... Really? You have to be either blind or a spinning Trumpesque not to see how unprepared is the British position. It is completely embarrassing. If we are to leave, then the Brexit team should have formulated a plan knowing exactly what all of the implications of leaving are - and just got on with it so as best prepare the country for day 1 outside the EU. This isn't happening because the Cabinet is divided, the Conservative Party is divided, Labour are divided - the whole fucking country is divided. I mean - what is the point in announcing an EU immigration impact study now?? This is going to be vital information that should have been available before the referendum was announced and now it is going to be finished just a few months before March 2019. I mean.. really what the absolute fuck. " Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. " That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Whilst time marches on, it's only fair to point out that it took the EU a month to acknowledge that we formally wanted to leave, and then nearly another two months for formal negotiations to start. So 1/8th of the available time was taken for the process to actually begin. And whilst the EU may want the bill sorting first, my understanding was that the UK was only given some sort of detailed breakdown during the last formal talks, a couple of weeks ago. Come on... Really? You have to be either blind or a spinning Trumpesque not to see how unprepared is the British position. It is completely embarrassing. If we are to leave, then the Brexit team should have formulated a plan knowing exactly what all of the implications of leaving are - and just got on with it so as best prepare the country for day 1 outside the EU. This isn't happening because the Cabinet is divided, the Conservative Party is divided, Labour are divided - the whole fucking country is divided. I mean - what is the point in announcing an EU immigration impact study now?? This is going to be vital information that should have been available before the referendum was announced and now it is going to be finished just a few months before March 2019. I mean.. really what the absolute fuck. You can thank your Tory heroes Cameron and Osborne for that, they called the referendum without putting in any of these details beforehand and they also ran through the whole EU referendum campaign without any contingency plan in place for the event of a leave vote. The Tory Remainers Cameron and Osborne negligent and incompetent to the extreme. " and yet when the vote came in to leave people like you on here were saying that Article 50 should be triggered straight away..? its not only Cameron and Osborne who were unprepared, the leave campaign hierarchy whose sole aim was an out vote had done no work what so ever.. in fact Gove and Bojo bottled it leadership wise.. there's not many smelling of roses thus far in the Tory party.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Whilst time marches on, it's only fair to point out that it took the EU a month to acknowledge that we formally wanted to leave, and then nearly another two months for formal negotiations to start. So 1/8th of the available time was taken for the process to actually begin. And whilst the EU may want the bill sorting first, my understanding was that the UK was only given some sort of detailed breakdown during the last formal talks, a couple of weeks ago. Come on... Really? You have to be either blind or a spinning Trumpesque not to see how unprepared is the British position. It is completely embarrassing. If we are to leave, then the Brexit team should have formulated a plan knowing exactly what all of the implications of leaving are - and just got on with it so as best prepare the country for day 1 outside the EU. This isn't happening because the Cabinet is divided, the Conservative Party is divided, Labour are divided - the whole fucking country is divided. I mean - what is the point in announcing an EU immigration impact study now?? This is going to be vital information that should have been available before the referendum was announced and now it is going to be finished just a few months before March 2019. I mean.. really what the absolute fuck. Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. " maybe because one of the remainers was the then Home Sec whose record on immigration was that of failure.. egg on faces etc.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people." Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? " Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. " "Vote Leave" would have only screamed "Liars" at the study result while brainwashing potential leave voters into believing Iran was joining the EU next week & bringing Sharia law to the streets of London, along with 790 million Iranians just after the 979 million Turks had rocked up at Blackpool. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. "Vote Leave" would have only screamed "Liars" at the study result while brainwashing potential leave voters into believing Iran was joining the EU next week & bringing Sharia law to the streets of London, along with 790 million Iranians just after the 979 million Turks had rocked up at Blackpool." aw ffs get a life or a handsrchief | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. "Vote Leave" would have only screamed "Liars" at the study result while brainwashing potential leave voters into believing Iran was joining the EU next week & bringing Sharia law to the streets of London, along with 790 million Iranians just after the 979 million Turks had rocked up at Blackpool. aw ffs get a life or a handsrchief" Wer wud aye git ar handsrchief | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control"" And there have been other studies that say the opposite. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. "Vote Leave" would have only screamed "Liars" at the study result while brainwashing potential leave voters into believing Iran was joining the EU next week & bringing Sharia law to the streets of London, along with 790 million Iranians just after the 979 million Turks had rocked up at Blackpool." Pathetic. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019." worst cars ever ask any dealer I had nightmares when I sold one until warranty expired | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. "Vote Leave" would have only screamed "Liars" at the study result while brainwashing potential leave voters into believing Iran was joining the EU next week & bringing Sharia law to the streets of London, along with 790 million Iranians just after the 979 million Turks had rocked up at Blackpool. Pathetic." Bet that well rounded thought out response took you some time eh ? So Leave campaign never stated that Turkey with a population of 76 million are waiting to come here "with the little footsteps going through a door with a big UK passport next to it" on the campaign posters stating as FACT Turkey IS JOINING THE EU ? While I exaggerated it's only an exaggeration of the truth. Pathetic eh ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. "Vote Leave" would have only screamed "Liars" at the study result while brainwashing potential leave voters into believing Iran was joining the EU next week & bringing Sharia law to the streets of London, along with 790 million Iranians just after the 979 million Turks had rocked up at Blackpool. Pathetic. Bet that well rounded thought out response took you some time eh ? So Leave campaign never stated that Turkey with a population of 76 million are waiting to come here "with the little footsteps going through a door with a big UK passport next to it" on the campaign posters stating as FACT Turkey IS JOINING THE EU ? While I exaggerated it's only an exaggeration of the truth. Pathetic eh ? " So you're ok with exaggerating the truth to prove point..... The irony of that is astounding. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" And there have been other studies that say the opposite." Yeah but they just simply ignore them if it doesn't fit in with their world view. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" And there have been other studies that say the opposite. Yeah but they just simply ignore them if it doesn't fit in with their world view. " So which study have you not ignored, and taken on board, that says immigration is positive for the UK? Surely you haven't simply ignored them because they dont fit with your world view. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" And there have been other studies that say the opposite. Yeah but they just simply ignore them if it doesn't fit in with their world view. So which study have you not ignored, and taken on board, that says immigration is positive for the UK? Surely you haven't simply ignored them because they dont fit with your world view." So which study have you not ignored, and taken on board, that says immigration is negative for the UK? Surely you haven't simply ignored them because they don't fit with your world view. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" And there have been other studies that say the opposite. Yeah but they just simply ignore them if it doesn't fit in with their world view. So which study have you not ignored, and taken on board, that says immigration is positive for the UK? Surely you haven't simply ignored them because they dont fit with your world view. So which study have you not ignored, and taken on board, that says immigration is negative for the UK? Surely you haven't simply ignored them because they don't fit with your world view. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" And there have been other studies that say the opposite. Yeah but they just simply ignore them if it doesn't fit in with their world view. So which study have you not ignored, and taken on board, that says immigration is positive for the UK? Surely you haven't simply ignored them because they dont fit with your world view. So which study have you not ignored, and taken on board, that says immigration is negative for the UK? Surely you haven't simply ignored them because they don't fit with your world view. " You're the one making the accusation Centaur, so which one is your favourite? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control"" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? " CLCC, 2017. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? " What do you think is the purpose of this initiative? Think it through. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It's utterly pointeless starting a general pros and cons of brexit. Theyve been done on here a million times over. The point is, CLCC, its utter stupidity to ask what the benefits of brexit have been when we haven't even exited. Anybody with a basic grasp of logic can see that. You are the only one persuing it. I think you'll find nearly every news outlet in the country is covering it actually.
You clearly don't listen to the news as in this thread just 2 hours ago you said there would be 5 years of transition upon exit. It was on the news early this morning long before you posted that Philip Hammomd said the cabinet has agreed on a 3 year transition period. 3 years is closer to the David Davis 2 year transition as Philip Hammond originally said he wanted a 5 year transition. Your 5 year transition is out the window, it'll be 3 years max and no more.
Previous brexiters have said on this forum that it wouldn't even take two years from the referendum , now you are saying its going to be six years from the referendum. Most of those people have now quietly slipped away, no longer willing to embarrass themselves trying to defend it.
It's you who has embarrassed yourself on this thread talking about 5 years of transition just 2 hours ago when it was all over the news this morning the cabinet had agreed 3 years. Brexit secretary David Davis said he preferred a 2 year transition, and Philip Hammond said he wanted 5 years originally. It seems Hammond has had to concede the most ground as 3 year transition is 2 years away from his preferred 5. 3 years is only 1 year away from David Davis preferred 2 year transition. "Sorry Centaur, looks like it hasn't been discussed by cabinet at all!
Brexit: Fox holds firm on opposing free movement - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40767023 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017." So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? What do you think is the purpose of this initiative? Think it through. " It's a cost/benefit analysis. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019." A tad behind the comment party... But it's not really worth very much to the UK, and basically it costs less to add a battery to the car than it does to build a new factory. So - Anyone who thinks this is a ringing endorsement of the UK post Brexit is sadly mistaken... It's worth merely a small fraction of a new plant. And I bet the second the UK workers strike and shoot themselves in the foot (like they did in the 70's) Magna Steyr will be waiting quite eagerly for their Euros. Roll on Brexit Vote #2 ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true." Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? " the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged." Prove that's not the reason... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged." Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. A tad behind the comment party... But it's not really worth very much to the UK, and basically it costs less to add a battery to the car than it does to build a new factory. So - Anyone who thinks this is a ringing endorsement of the UK post Brexit is sadly mistaken... It's worth merely a small fraction of a new plant. And I bet the second the UK workers strike and shoot themselves in the foot (like they did in the 70's) Magna Steyr will be waiting quite eagerly for their Euros. Roll on Brexit Vote #2 ! " We already had Brexit vote #2, it was called the general election 2017 which the Conservatives won on a Brexit manifesto. The pro remain parties like the Lib dems, greens and SNP could only muster a pathetic 15% of the vote combined between them at the general election. Brexit manifestos (conservative, Labour and Ukip) got a combined 85% of the vote. So if nothing else the general election was another ringing endorsement for Brexit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. A tad behind the comment party... But it's not really worth very much to the UK, and basically it costs less to add a battery to the car than it does to build a new factory. So - Anyone who thinks this is a ringing endorsement of the UK post Brexit is sadly mistaken... It's worth merely a small fraction of a new plant. And I bet the second the UK workers strike and shoot themselves in the foot (like they did in the 70's) Magna Steyr will be waiting quite eagerly for their Euros. Roll on Brexit Vote #2 ! We already had Brexit vote #2, it was called the general election 2017 which the Conservatives won on a Brexit manifesto. The pro remain parties like the Lib dems, greens and SNP could only muster a pathetic 15% of the vote combined between them at the general election. Brexit manifestos (conservative, Labour and Ukip) got a combined 85% of the vote. So if nothing else the general election was another ringing endorsement for Brexit. "This guy is priceless...I'll say this once more as a Labour voter.....and a remainer....i accept brexit is going to happen....i did after the referendum on it....but for him to even suggest that brexit has been voted on twice is quite ridiculous tbh....i voted for a number of reasons as ive stated in numerous other posts on here....brexit was very long down the list.....and if this is the case and you think a vote for Labour was a vote for brexit then genius why did i waste my vote and not vote for one of the pro remain parties......you Centaur are really comedy gold in your own little world of thinking....no wonder the brexit vote went its way it did | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. " And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education?" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education?" My, not July! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education?" I've never heard of July education, so I dont know what that is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" We already had Brexit vote #2, it was called the general election 2017 which the Conservatives won on a Brexit manifesto. The pro remain parties like the Lib dems, greens and SNP could only muster a pathetic 15% of the vote combined between them at the general election. Brexit manifestos (conservative, Labour and Ukip) got a combined 85% of the vote. So if nothing else the general election was another ringing endorsement for Brexit. "It's the total lack of logic and reasoning this post highlights to such a glaring degree that makes me worried for the prosperity of our country. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. A tad behind the comment party... But it's not really worth very much to the UK, and basically it costs less to add a battery to the car than it does to build a new factory. So - Anyone who thinks this is a ringing endorsement of the UK post Brexit is sadly mistaken... It's worth merely a small fraction of a new plant. And I bet the second the UK workers strike and shoot themselves in the foot (like they did in the 70's) Magna Steyr will be waiting quite eagerly for their Euros. Roll on Brexit Vote #2 ! We already had Brexit vote #2, it was called the general election 2017 which the Conservatives won on a Brexit manifesto. The pro remain parties like the Lib dems, greens and SNP could only muster a pathetic 15% of the vote combined between them at the general election. Brexit manifestos (conservative, Labour and Ukip) got a combined 85% of the vote. So if nothing else the general election was another ringing endorsement for Brexit.
This guy is priceless...I'll say this once more as a Labour voter.....and a remainer....i accept brexit is going to happen....i did after the referendum on it....but for him to even suggest that brexit has been voted on twice is quite ridiculous tbh....i voted for a number of reasons as ive stated in numerous other posts on here....brexit was very long down the list.....and if this is the case and you think a vote for Labour was a vote for brexit then genius why did i waste my vote and not vote for one of the pro remain parties......you Centaur are really comedy gold in your own little world of thinking....no wonder the brexit vote went its way it did "You voted for Labour then you voted for Brexit by default. Brexit was in the Labour party general election manifesto! You'd have to be pretty dim not to realise what you were voting for when you put your X next to your Labour candidate in the polling booth. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great news for Oxford, BMW has announced the new all-electric mini will be built in Oxford from 2019. A tad behind the comment party... But it's not really worth very much to the UK, and basically it costs less to add a battery to the car than it does to build a new factory. So - Anyone who thinks this is a ringing endorsement of the UK post Brexit is sadly mistaken... It's worth merely a small fraction of a new plant. And I bet the second the UK workers strike and shoot themselves in the foot (like they did in the 70's) Magna Steyr will be waiting quite eagerly for their Euros. Roll on Brexit Vote #2 ! We already had Brexit vote #2, it was called the general election 2017 which the Conservatives won on a Brexit manifesto. The pro remain parties like the Lib dems, greens and SNP could only muster a pathetic 15% of the vote combined between them at the general election. Brexit manifestos (conservative, Labour and Ukip) got a combined 85% of the vote. So if nothing else the general election was another ringing endorsement for Brexit.
This guy is priceless...I'll say this once more as a Labour voter.....and a remainer....i accept brexit is going to happen....i did after the referendum on it....but for him to even suggest that brexit has been voted on twice is quite ridiculous tbh....i voted for a number of reasons as ive stated in numerous other posts on here....brexit was very long down the list.....and if this is the case and you think a vote for Labour was a vote for brexit then genius why did i waste my vote and not vote for one of the pro remain parties......you Centaur are really comedy gold in your own little world of thinking....no wonder the brexit vote went its way it did
You voted for Labour then you voted for Brexit by default. Brexit was in the Labour party general election manifesto! You'd have to be pretty dim not to realise what you were voting for when you put your X next to your Labour candidate in the polling booth."Fck me what planet are you on | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education? I've never heard of July education, so I dont know what that is. " You posted this a full hour after my correction, and immediately below my correction. (Trying to make a cheap jibe, and avoiding, yet again, answering questions). You also obviously do not have the capability to be able to take a simple 11 word question in response to your post, (with just two of those words having more than one syllable!), and know what I was asking. And you choose to question my level of education! Or maybe you were insulting me because you have nowhere else to go with your argument. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education? I've never heard of July education, so I dont know what that is. You posted this a full hour after my correction, and immediately below my correction. (Trying to make a cheap jibe, and avoiding, yet again, answering questions). You also obviously do not have the capability to be able to take a simple 11 word question in response to your post, (with just two of those words having more than one syllable!), and know what I was asking. And you choose to question my level of education! Or maybe you were insulting me because you have nowhere else to go with your argument. " Im just saying you don't demonstrate that you have been trained in academic writing. Maybe I'm wrong, have you been? My highest level of education is currently level 7 and I'm thinking about a level 8 qualification. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education? I've never heard of July education, so I dont know what that is. You posted this a full hour after my correction, and immediately below my correction. (Trying to make a cheap jibe, and avoiding, yet again, answering questions). You also obviously do not have the capability to be able to take a simple 11 word question in response to your post, (with just two of those words having more than one syllable!), and know what I was asking. And you choose to question my level of education! Or maybe you were insulting me because you have nowhere else to go with your argument. Im just saying you don't demonstrate that you have been trained in academic writing. Maybe I'm wrong, have you been? My highest level of education is currently level 7 and I'm thinking about a level 8 qualification. " You have not once mentioned training in academic writing....not once. Until now. So you look down on people with a lower education level than yourself then? Think their all thick and stupid? Shouldn't be allowed to post on here? (Btw L6) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Yes, you'd have thought that remainers would have done that study, to surely prove their point. I can't understand why the didn't. That is an odd thing to say? Why would "Remainers" only want facts.... oh wait a minute. Yes you are correct. Facts are meaningless to some people. Why is it an odd thing to say? After all, it was remainers trying to convince people to vote to stay. It was leavers saying that too much immigration is a cost and nit a benefit. So why didn't the remain side do the study then to prove otherwise? Because there have already been dozens of studies into this and they have found immigration to be positive. You guys simply ignore them. The point of the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" Can you supply the source as to the objective of the report the government have commissioned being to justify immigration levels remaining the same or increasing after we have "taken back control" please? CLCC, 2017. So, what you say is government direction or policy is not, in fact, true. Wrong again! I am saying that's my opinion of why they are going it, can you prove that that is NOT why they are doing it? the one the government have commissioned is to justify why the immigration levels will remain the same, or even increase, after we have "taken back control" You didn't say this was your opinion until challenged. Everything that I say on here is my opinion, if its not, then I quote my sources. If you don't understand that, perhaps it reflects on your level of education. And what do you think July level of education is then? And what is your level of education? I've never heard of July education, so I dont know what that is. You posted this a full hour after my correction, and immediately below my correction. (Trying to make a cheap jibe, and avoiding, yet again, answering questions). You also obviously do not have the capability to be able to take a simple 11 word question in response to your post, (with just two of those words having more than one syllable!), and know what I was asking. And you choose to question my level of education! Or maybe you were insulting me because you have nowhere else to go with your argument. Im just saying you don't demonstrate that you have been trained in academic writing. Maybe I'm wrong, have you been? My highest level of education is currently level 7 and I'm thinking about a level 8 qualification. " Really who gives a fuck about anyone's level of education? For someone who 'claims' to be so educated you do come across as incredibly dim on here at times. Plus education level is no indicator of real intelligence. I'd be willing to take an IQ test against you any day of the week and I'd be willing to bet I'd beat you by a country mile. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
