1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

E.U: Leave or Stay? Your thoughts.

Discussion in 'Serious' started by TheBlackSwordsMan, 22 Feb 2016.

  1. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    388
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Disequilibria

    Disequilibria Minimodder

    Joined:
    30 Sep 2015
    Posts:
    855
    Likes Received:
    16
    :rolleyes:

    Posted completely without irony. :hehe:



    But yeah don't argue with the reasons why I consider conclusions drawn from council by elections or imprecise opinion polls as inferior to intention polls.

    Just call it confirmation bias without realising you'd have to be as guilty as I.

    Try playing the ball not the man.

    Let's see at the next general election, tenner says you're wrong and the Liberals get less than 20%.
     
  3. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    388
    I'm not the one claiming no significant amount of the 16 million people who voted to remain would vote for a party offering them exactly that.

    I've tried that but your totally deaf to any reasoned argument, all you do is discount, dismiss, ignore, and come up with excuses for why data that doesn't fit your opinion is flawed while using that very same flawed data to backup your beliefs.

    And where have i exhibited confirmation bias exactly? All I've done is say your wrong for thinking no significant amount of the 16 million people who voted to remain would vote for a party offering them exactly that, anyone with a modicum of sense can see such a claim doesn't hold water.

    That's exactly what I've been doing, perhaps you'd like to point out where I've made personal attacks against you, and no saying you're suffering from confirmation bias is not an insult as it's true.

    Even if they did I'm guessing you'd come up with some reason why it wasn't a valid 20%.
     
  4. Disequilibria

    Disequilibria Minimodder

    Joined:
    30 Sep 2015
    Posts:
    855
    Likes Received:
    16
    People have done so in the past. You seem to be claiming that the whole political landscape will change.

    You assume that they all think this is more important than everything else combined or want a second referendum like you do.

    Funny my reasons are just excuses and yours aren't

    i have always been wary of polls that ask opinions that are much more nuanced.
    I have never put stock in council by elections
    I am not changing what evidence I believe to suit my opinion

    Intentions are different from opinions.
    By elections suffer from this:

    Anyone with a modicum of sense would see that it isn't as simple as that and there's a lot more to consider than one issue.

    Do you not see how convienient your position is. I am arguing the Lib dems will not change the outcome of all this in any significant way for the next election.

    Do you not read yourself!
    "Oh council by election matter more than voting intention polls"
    Gives list of weaknesses by elections have
    "you've got confirmation bias"
    "la la la I'm right, you're wrong, you've got confirmation bias"



    All I seem to see is accusations I am suffering from confirmation bias rather than actually arguing with my reasons. That is playing the man.

    ou're not dealing with what makes me sceptical of your position but trying to divinate why.

    Your problem is that you argue with someone and when they're not convinced by you, you decide it must be confirmation bias and not that it could be possible that you never actually offered anything convincing enough to change someone's mind.

    No then they got above 20% in a general

    It's quite clear cut.

    I'd even call them doing it in 2018 if they'd started polling at 25% and it's increasing for months

    I'd guess if it came out less you'd give excuses out till the cows come home. It seems like you're unaware you are judging others by your own standards.
     
    Last edited: 1 Aug 2016
  5. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,711
    Likes Received:
    2,154
    Let's see if the next French government still feels that way.

    Hunting unicorns, more like. Here's how the EU perceives the negotiating position:

    Smooth negotiating, right there. :p

    Well, if you keep going back for hand jobs... (Perhaps we should find another analogy... :worried: )

    Except that this right-wing Leaver is an elected representative of the British government.

    I didn't know there was an objective proof of being retarded (although now I'm thinking about it...)

    It wasn't the Remain camp that rode the racist tiger to get the vote. And where's the plan, Brexit boy? :p

    It may be a close call at times and present company excepted, but know which side is coming off looking more morally corrupt and stupid at the moment, and it ain't the Remainers.
     
    Last edited: 1 Aug 2016
  6. Disequilibria

    Disequilibria Minimodder

    Joined:
    30 Sep 2015
    Posts:
    855
    Likes Received:
    16
    True enough. we'll have to see.

    Would have helped for the government to do some ground work on exploring the options before and planning. The BoE did but then again they're much more serious people.




    :hehe:

    Ye probably should....

    Elected representative of the people in the south east.

    If you look at the economic theory on currency unions, then on the reality of EZ countries, then look at the implementation of the EMU, then look at the devastation that started just 8 years along, then look at how the solutions are already well known, then look at how far they've got to fixing it and finally how they've implemented some of their short term fives.

    Throughout all of that you could only come to one conclusion that the EMU is retarded.

    Then to schengen...............

    Elected representative of the people in the south east.

    [​IMG] (disclaimer: Economically impossible in normal times)

    Can't talk about immigration without being called racist still, ageing hippy liberal douche? :p

    [​IMG]
    That attitude is part of what got your lot into this bother in the first place

    I'm not arguing that many don't look like that, I'm still irritated somewhat at the way they went about the campaign. Leave could have won easily,I think possibly by more, without the crazy claims while ridiculing project fear and a concentration on the values side which gave the most powerful argument.

    But this is the reality:

     
    Last edited: 1 Aug 2016
  7. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    388
    Yea because it's not like you're discussing this in a thread that only exists because a party that wanted out of the EU got 4m votes and changed the political landscape or anything is it?

    That's because yours are based on hypothesis and mine is a fact, your even discussing this in a thread that proves the fact, a party whose raison d'etre was to leave the EU got 3% of the vote in 2010 and 13% in 2015 yet for some reason you can't see that working the other way around.

    If you've always been wary of polls that ask opinions that are much more nuanced then maybe you should have looked at the question those polls asked, hint: it wasn't a nuanced question.

    Also if you've never put stock in council by elections then all i can say is that runs contrary to every political party, commentator, analysis and study.

    4 million people, that being how many votes UKIP got, disagree with you and that's before we throw in the people who voted Conservatives in the last GE just because they offered a referendum.

    You're arguing that a party who has a particular position with regards to either leaving or remaining in the EU can't effect a major change in a thread that's discussing exactly that, if a party will not change the outcome of all this in any significant way for the next election then how do you explain UKIP having done exactly that?

    You're basically saying that although the rise in popularity of a Eurosceptic party forced a major party into plebiscite that the exact same thing now can't happen with a Europhile party, it defies logic.

    No it's saying how something is, it's saying that you can't see the elephant in the room even when you're posting comments on its back.

    Seriously? Your saying that in a thread that only exists because of the very reasons your saying aren't possible.

    I'm not judging anyone by my own standards, I'm judging by the cold hard fact that the rise in popularity of a single issue party caused a major party to drop a brick, that a major parties internal squabbles threatened to tear it apart with a series of defections, that a major party exhibited an epic amount of hubris and thought governing by plebiscite was a good idea.

    It all boils down to this, you're saying the Lib Dems standing on a stay in the EU ticket isn't going to get enough votes to effect any change, but if we swap the parties and the position for UKIP and leaving the EU we find ourselves in this very thread discussing brexit.
     
    Last edited: 2 Aug 2016
  8. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,711
    Likes Received:
    2,154
    And perhaps the Brexiteers could have. It's not like they didn't have twenty years to think about it and there wasn't, like, a detailed Flexcit plan knocking about. The very fact that there was no impetus to even sketch out a vague outline of a plan, for Johnson and Gove to even make sure that they had a mutual understanding of what they were campaigning for, tells me that nobody actually grasps the complex realities of Brexit --except some civil servants and constitutional lawyers who I have been watching in meetings on Parliament.tv laughing incredulously in a state of borderline hysteria.

    I think that the government and Brexiteers still don't have a clue about how complex this process is going to be. They have no idea. None at all. They're still talking about being out by 2020. That is simply not going to happen. They're still chasing unicorns, and that is actually concerning.

    Apparently can't talk about immigration without being racist, the referendum campaign seems to have demonstrated. When even UKIP voters complain about it, you know that you've gone over the edge somewhere.
     
    Last edited: 2 Aug 2016
  9. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    388
    To be fair they could technically do it by 2020, it would be a train wreck but there's nothing stopping them from wrecking things, we could be clearing up the mess for generations but what's new. :)
     
  10. impar

    impar Minimodder

    Joined:
    24 Nov 2006
    Posts:
    3,109
    Likes Received:
    44
    Greetings!

    Ah! This explains a lot:
    [​IMG]
    :lol:
     
    Nexxo likes this.
  11. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,711
    Likes Received:
    2,154
    "Hey, are we still in the game?". --Existenz, by David Cronenberg :p

     
    Last edited: 2 Aug 2016
  12. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,711
    Likes Received:
    2,154
    Yeah, but May doesn't strike me as a PM who wants to preside over a train wreck. And I suspect that the Brexiteers don't want it on their CV either. David Davis has gone quiet lately...

     
    Last edited: 2 Aug 2016
  13. GreatPretender

    GreatPretender What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    26 Jun 2016
    Posts:
    41
    Likes Received:
    1
    Now the vote is cast in favour of leave and May has said she is committed to delivering, what exactly does everyone want to happen next? I'm talking about achievable goals here not pie in the sky wishful thinking? Instead of beating round the bushes with never ending argument/debate, it would be good to hear what people want not what they disagree on.
     
  14. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,711
    Likes Received:
    2,154
    Last edited: 2 Aug 2016
  15. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    388
    Leaving aside what leaving actually means i think it would be a good idea to be part of a politico-economic organisation where we can work together on common interests for the betterment of everyone, one where there's some common regulations on things like product safety rules, worker rights, environmental regulations, all the things that aren't restricted by lines we've drawn on a map, maybe we should join a single market or something. ;) :D
     
  16. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,711
    Likes Received:
    2,154
    Hey, I've got an idea! What if this single market also involved, say, a political union of sorts, so we can more effectively respond to global threats like global warming, environmental pollution and terrorism --you know, stuff that doesn't neatly stop at borders-- and also allows us to stand up to and regulate global corporations so we do not end up helpless exploited victims of rampant globalism? :D
     
  17. t5kcannon

    t5kcannon Minimodder

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    140
    Likes Received:
    2
    I agree with you. But it's quite a bit worse than that. Ahead of the June 23rd referendum, the Cameron government ordered that civil service undertake no contingency planning for Brexit, beyond limited preparations by the Treasury and the Bank of England. This ban on civil service planning amounted to, according to the Foreign Affairs Committee, "gross negligence". Recently on the radio, the cross-bench peer Peter Hennessy, who is usually quite reserved, remarked that the instruction to ban the civil service from researching the Brexit question was a "dereliction of duty".
    Nevermind for a moment if the UK should exit the EU or not, first and foremost Cameron had the duty to act such that the economic and political stability of the UK is furthered. In reality, Cameron did the precise opposite: He tried to hype up in the eyes of the market the negative impact of a leave vote and predicted political turnoil on a Biblical scale, with World War 3 and all that jazz. Cameron instructed the civil service (beyond the Treasury and BOE) not to prepair for the possibility of Brexit, and then when he lost the referendum (after giving the guarantee that he would remain PM no matter the outcome) resigned, and after doing so gave his wife's hair stylist an OBE. This series of events represent some of the worst post-War leadership this country has seen.
     
  18. Broadwater06

    Broadwater06 Minimodder

    Joined:
    10 Apr 2016
    Posts:
    274
    Likes Received:
    13
    Certainly that Cameron will go down as one of the worst PM in British history, except in the eyes of his small loyal (wealthy) followers that benefited greatly.
     
  19. Nexxo

    Nexxo * Prefab Sprout – The King of Rock 'n' Roll

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    34,711
    Likes Received:
    2,154
    First, David Cameron never mentioned WWIII:

    It was Boris Johnson who hyperboled it as usual:

    Second, although Cameron certainly should have had a short-term contingency plan, it is not possible to have any form of realistic plan for the wild unicorn and rainbow fantasies of the Brexiteers. No matter what Cameron would have done, a realistic plan would have fallen woefully short of the Leavers' unrealistic expectations and would never been regarded as good enough. Vote Leave on the other hand represented a movement that had been campaigning to leave the EU for twenty years, so one would expect that at the very least they'd have some sort of consistent and coherent vision of what "leaving" means, and some sort of rough idea of how to go about it. The Leave Alliance for instance has a researched, referenced and foot-noted 308-page document doing exactly that, so it's not as if there wasn't something that they could quickly refer to. They campaigned for it; they own it, now they should have a plan.

    But we got none of that. We got blatant lies and unrealistic promises which were revoked the very next day after the referendum, and it turns out that Johnson's "leaving the EU" was very different from Gove's "leaving the EU" while Farage had no vision at all except just "leaving", although he is still living in Belgium (where, despite being resident for the last twenty years he still doesn't speak either of the two local languages. He also has a retirement property in France). In fact we're several months in now, and there is still no consensus on what "leaving the EU" actually means from the three Brexiteers who are now in charge of the process.

    That alone should worry you. Because it means that the Brexiteers have already decided that the simplest and quickest to realise default position, "leaving the EU for the WTO" is deeply undesirable. Instead they are still trying to figure out how they might have at least some of their cake and eat it, and Article 50 is now scheduled for autumn 2017. Maybe. Project Reality, it turns out, sucks a bit.
     
    Last edited: 3 Aug 2016
  20. t5kcannon

    t5kcannon Minimodder

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2011
    Posts:
    140
    Likes Received:
    2
    Lets keep to the topic instead of deviating around. You must surely agree that it was a dereliction of duty to instruct the civil service (outside the BOE and Treasury) not to research the question of Brexit and what it might mean. Above all else, the leaders of a country have a duty to offset as best as they can negative shocks (be they economic, political or security in nature). Leave aside the stuff that you have come up with regarding leaving the EU or not, and step away from that for a moment: In principle, you must surely agree that the leaders have a duty to mitigate shocks as best as they can (and not to act such that the negative shocks are amplified)?
     

Share This Page