You are right, if I'm not mistaken in France it was a policy from the 80s. My point is that it was a french policy that artificially made diesel more competitive than petrol, the recent narratives are that diesel is now surtaxed or that the EU was the source. In reality, the main reason was that french car manufacturers, mainly PSA, were particularly good with diesel engines, so they lobbied for an advantageous fiscal policy for diesel.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
You are right, if I'm not mistaken in France it was a policy from the 80s. My point is that it was a french policy that artificially made diesel more competitive than petrol, the recent narratives are that diesel is now surtaxed or that the EU was the source. In reality, the main reason was that french car manufacturers, mainly PSA, were particularly good with diesel engines, so they lobbied for an advantageous fiscal policy for diesel.
Even if we come up with some new amazing technology that solves all our problems, Do the brexiteers expect the EU to accept this theoretical tech untested? and if it isn't ready in time what then.....wouldn't we need a backstop to the alternative tech arrangement?
Which is what us in the current WA anyway
Which is what us in the current WA anyway
The only area where he is an expert is as a confidence trickster.
Incite or encourage?
Encourage vigorously.
Exactly, and the same goes for the German car manufacturers. Another element in this was of course the world wide plans for reducing greenhouse emissons which came together in for example the Kyoto protocol. Because for a long time diesel cars were or have been the (slightly) better choice when it comes to reducing CO2 emissions.
Problem being that we've realised now that this doesn't necessarily weigh up against the other polluting effects of diesel cars which negatively influence for example the air quality.
Until the last 10-15 years, diesel engines were dirty, slow, noisy, expensive and thoroughly unpleasant. I think that, as much as anything, put people off.
Wouldn't it be more like the last 20 or even 25 years? I remember my uncle getting this ridiculous 150 hp VW Bora turbodiesel around the start of this century, that was one hell of a car back then. I can only imagine how unpleasant diesel must've been in the 70's and 80's though. Not that it really matters or is particularly relevant to the Brexit discussion by the way.
Yeh, you're probably right, but the reputation followed the diesel engine, in the UK, up until around 15 year's ago.
They really don't care .If the troubles come back and thousands more die here they will just shrug and blame everyone else buy themselves
They clearly managed to also forget the Tory conference getting bombed in Brighton. Last time they didn't get to just sit back and let someone else deal with it. Hopefully it won't take something that dramatic to wake them up to quite how life and death this stuff is.
So apparently the people of sunderland are getting what they asked for. The new X-trail will be manufactured in Japan, not Brexit Britain.
So much snark in the comments. The whole thing has become toxic on both sides.
Doesn't matter a jot.
David Davis reckons we'll all be in Aston Martins.
(More like Austin Allegros)
I'm pretty swayed towards this argument in general to be honest.
https://www.vice.com/en_au/article/nnydd8/brexit-proves-baby-boomers-should-get-less-of-a-vote
https://www.vice.com/en_au/article/nnydd8/brexit-proves-baby-boomers-should-get-less-of-a-vote
We should be able to rely on the sound judgement of older generations, based on experience etc. Wise heads should be able to see through populist noise.
Instead older voters seem to be the radicals at the moment. Very sad.
I agree with this mainly because politicians focus too much on the short term, and, frankly, old people have too much power and are selfish enough to repeatedly shaft the young.
Loads of young people just voted for Jeremy Corbyn so we should probably ban them from voting as well
So some 35yo gets only 60% of a vote for an election mandate that last only 5 years. Sounds fair. Not.
Admittedly it's the only way Corbyn would ever get elected but be careful what you wish for.
The article discusses 'once in a generation' votes (i.e. brexit), which I feel this would be suitable for. I said I agree with the general point, there are some specifics I disagree with. I would probably have votes from everyone below the age of 40/50 weighted equally, then some sort of scaling based on how old you are. Like I said, I think this would work better for 'once in generation votes', but I also think it could work with periodical elections. As the article states, this system motivates politicians to deal with the problems of the future in a pro-active way.
This is what "control" looks like.
It sounds reasonable for genuinely transformational issues like Brexit. The pensioners who overwhelmingly voted leave are also a very inconvenient fact for those trying to portray Brexit as largely some kind of great, misguided cry for help from the left behind. It was in some cases but in many others it was comfortably off old people in the shires reacting to the “this country has gone to the dogs” stories they read in the Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph.
I think it was in plenty of cases. The country has gone to the proverbial dogs, but nothing to do with the EU. It's been due to relentless cuts to public services and a decade of stagnating salaries due to the financial crisis. At least in my book. I guess in the phrase itself there's a suggestion of subjectivity in the matter. Easiest thing of all is to blame it all on immigration, which is what the Brexiteers did.
You may argue these cuts were needed in order to re-balance the economy (usually opinions differ on this whether you are left or right leaning) instead of borrowing and hoping to grow our way out of the debt. Assuming that it was the correct course of action simply implies a finality in that the country would go to the dogs post financial crisis no matter what. It still hurt people and keeps hurting them though, and it was all down to a financial asset bubble that bankers and policy makers allowed to get out of control, while leaving the taxpayer to foot the bill. Another reason for a protest vote.
Obviously that doesn't explain the angry pensioners. Their pensions were safe, their properties kept increasing in price due to construction stopping and the jobs market was a complete irrelevance to them. I'm chalking that off to standard old person syndrome, aka "back in my day...". Always complaining and always nostalgic of their youth. No matter how much better things are compared to the past, they will always and forever prefer what is familiar to them and would drag everyone back to that if they could.
Last edited:
Let’s face it, the average joe blogs in the street didn’t vote for control of ports etc that the MPs drivel on about. They voted on issues such as the perception that Johnny Foreigner is taking too many jobs, ‘sovereignty’ even though no one really has a clue what this buzzword meant and of course the big red bus of lies.
Average joe bloggs looks at reports like this, shrugs and says gerronwithit
So you could have a window of opportunity to smuggle anything you want into the UK, pay no duty, pay no VAT, import all kinds of stuff that don't meet safety standards, firearms, bombs, drugs, immigrants. The gangsters will be getting ready.
Will only last a few days because it won't be the same going back the other way.
It all leads back to one problem, there never should have been referendum such as we had. Its been said many times but such a drastic change to the political and economic system should have never been decided by a simple majority.
It's always hard to have a perceived reality come crashing down around you. This reminds me of the time I discovered my penpal Chinuebze from Lagos wasn't actually third in line to the throne.
Brexit is a coup.
What he meant was he was queueing up for a sh!t
That'll explain the photographs...
On or off?
How ridiculous. Why not find everybody that would vote how you want and ban the rest? Kids these days and their idea of democracy. Fkin loons the lot of them.
At the Tijuana border the guards wave yank cars through while there are massive queues getting back to US. Seems logical to me.
US and Mexico are members of NAFTA and they have bilateral agreements. No deal literally means no deal.
Don’t engage with him, he clearly lacks any kind of basic understanding of trade deals (brexiter, colour me surprised) . UK in the no deal scenario would be trading under WTO terms (which it would violate) meaning literally any country would be subject to the same standards (waiving through in this case) when it comes to exporting the goods to the UK.
The reason for this idea is not based on the way they vote. It is based on how long you have to live with the consequences of the vote.
Anyway, I disagree with referendums in the first place, especially on complex issues such as Brexit. The UK is a parliamentary democracy for a reason.
Just saying, strict border checks one way only.
No less ridiculous.