Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
They all face a worse alternative, a Johnson let Tory government hell bent on no deal.

This way they all get a seat around the table to negotiate something they can all compromise and agree on, then put that vs remain (possibly vs no deal in a 3 way preference vote if they're sensible) on the ballot.

The Lib Dens view on revoking is based on an election victory providing them with the mandate, that mandate can also be achieved with a second ref.

Truth is their minds will be made up for them by the decisions made in the next 3 weeks and the effects they have on the polls. If the Tories can navigate the process of an extention being granted without losing support to Farage then it will be a 2nd ref before GE, if it leads to a Farage surge at the expense of the Tories it'll be GE first then who knows.


You don't understand. That's not an "alternative". If Johnson wins the next election, nothing the GNU does in the interim matters.
 
And yet centrist Labour voters like me are also very reluctant to vote for Corbyn as their are several manifesto tenants which are deal breakers for upper middle and aspiring classes.

I have no idea where to vote right now!

You vote whoever has the most chance in your specific constituency of defeating the Tories/Breixt party.

It's really not difficult. If you vote elsewhere because you might get taxed a couple percent more then you can't complain about Boris forcing through Brexit.
 

Let's say it takes, what, two minutes to walk up to someone's door and have a quick chat/give ample time to decide someone is not in. 30 homes an hour. That's 833 hours. Twelve hours a day maximum of doing that would be 69 days. 69 hehehehehe.
 
You don't understand. That's not an "alternative". If Johnson wins the next election, nothing the GNU does in the interim matters.

A GE that takes place after a 2nd ref is completely different to one that takes place before a resolution to the Brexit question, that's obvious. The majority of the public would be glad it's over, no matter what the outcome, and the election would be fought on far more usual issues (assuming the outcome of the 2nd ref didn't completely feck up the economy).
 
A GE that takes place after a 2nd ref is completely different to one that takes place before a resolution to the Brexit question, that's obvious. The majority of the public would be glad it's over, no matter what the outcome, and the election would be fought on far more usual issues (assuming the outcome of the 2nd ref didn't completely feck up the economy).

That's so removed from reality...
 
That's so removed from reality...

Well as I said, the way the next 3-4 weeks pans out will dictate how it goes, if they force Johnson to get an extention (quite possible given the Benn Act, no hope of the EU agreeing to his terms for a deal and the fact he's said he won't resign) then it'll probably severely weaken him electorally and we'll never find out.

However, if the Tories manage to come through it without losing support to the Brexit Party I think the opposition parties hands will be tied and we'll get to find out.

Personally I think most people just want a resolution one way or the other and despite the extemists making a lot of noise it will die out as the rest of the country moves on with their lives to what they consider to be more important issues (like I said, this assumes the out of all this isn't the economic disaster it could be).
 
How does someone get into the aspiring class ? Asking for friend.


Instinctively parents want for their children, a better life than they had themselves. That’s a universal truth since who knows when. And so I find it difficult to support Labour's current stance on private schools and inheritance. I’m not talking about 100s of years of generational wealth, simply people who have progressed through the economic classes through hard work and good parenting.

That’s aspiring for me: people who believe they and their family can progress over time through legal endeavour and hard work.

The problem with Labour's stance is that it attacks the core motivation and purpose of human life. And so it becomes a fundamental deal breaker for many I know, myself included.
 
Last edited:
I just bought some aspirational trousers...
You may joke, but capitalism is fundamentally built on this human behaviour. Brands being symbols of recognition etc, nowadays on steroids because of social media.
 
Instinctively parents want a better life for their children than they had. And so I find it difficult to support labours current stance on private schools and inheritance. I’m not talking about 100s of years of generational wealth, simply people who have progressed through the economic classes through hard work and good parenting.

That’s aspiring for me: people who believe they and their family can progress over time through legal endeavour and hard work.

The problem with Labours stance is it attacks the core motivation and reason for human life. And so it becomes a fundamental deal breaker for many I know, myself included.

Are you saying you wouldn't bother working upwards if you can't as a couple pass on more than 250k to your children? You think that passes the sniff test?

It's nothing to do with aspiration. People against IHT fall into two categories the offspring of well off parents (greed) or those who despise their money being taken by the state (hoarders).
 
Last edited:
Instinctively parents want a better life for their children than they had. And so I find it difficult to support labours current stance on private schools and inheritance. I’m not talking about 100s of years of generational wealth, simply people who have progressed through the economic classes through hard work and good parenting.

That’s aspiring for me: people who believe they and their family can progress over time through legal endeavour and hard work.

What makes it so enticing is that it is so unthreatening to the status quo. A few people from the lower echelons are allowed to rise through the ranks and achieve more than their parents or grandparents, but the class constraints of wider society remain entrenched: the senior ranks of the legal profession continue to be made up of predominantly private school alumni, even though only 7% of the population go to fee-paying schools.

Funding schemes that concentrate on a few children from state schools have a good success rate because the stakes are so low: the “gifted and talented” scheme introduced by the Labour government in 2002, then scrapped in 2010, identified children who were performing well, then claimed success when they went on to achieve good grades. Ditto grammar schools: by filtering children through exams at the end of primary school, they can ensure they accept children who are likely to perform well regardless. Their high success rate is not because they boost the majority of children, but because they pre-select a small number of high-ability children.

Progressing beyond social mobility means accepting a hard truth: what makes social mobility so popular is it plays into the idea that a handful of people are deserving of greater success because they have worked hard and are preternaturally talented. Removing some barriers to their success is seen as the answer to our strict and constraining class structure. Such thinking implies that the vast bulk of the working class are stuck with low wages and a precarious financial future because they haven’t worked hard enough to free themselves. It presupposes too that the working class is something to be escaped, further stigmatising the social experience of millions across the United Kingdom, and ensuring for those supposed social “success stories” the journey into the middle classes is an endlessly lonely experience.

Far harder is the pursuit of actual equality and justice: building a much better education system for all children. It means addressing health inequalities, and funding public health initiatives that address lower life expectancies, higher cancer and heart disease rates, higher infant mortality and suicide rates in different regions. It means making sure people have the opportunity to earn a decent wage and the right to request flexible working and better conditions.

One of the big problems with social mobility is that people are only ever comfortable with the mobility travelling one way – a handful of working class people permitted entry to the managerial classes if they offer an inspirational enough story and continue to tug their forelocks - but the rich have never been as comfortable with the idea that their offspring might be best suited to working in a supermarket.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/11/corbyn-ditch-social-mobility
So the rest of us lose(Losing means literally disabled people getting their benefits cut and dying) because your child ''might'' get the chance to go to The Bullingdon Club ?

The problem with Labours stance is it attacks the core motivation and reason for human life. And so it becomes a fundamental deal breaker for many I know, myself included.
Christ thats bleak. But fair enough I guess, it seems to be in your material interest not to vote Labour and the potential of the Bullingdon Club far weights such things as the stopping the sale of weapons to the saudi royal family, tackling the homelessness crisis , supporting people on benefits and trying to help save the planet with Labour Green New Deal. But hey at least your honest.

You may joke, but capitalism is fundamentally built on this human behaviour. Brands being symbols of recognition etc, nowadays on steroids because of social media.
At 9:00

 
So the rest of us lose(Losing means literally disabled people getting their benefits cut and dying) because your child ''might'' get the chance to go to The Bullingdon Club ?


Christ thats bleak. But fair enough I guess, it seems to be in your material interest not to vote Labour and the potential of the Bullingdon Club far weights such things as the stopping the sale of weapons to the saudi royal family, tackling the homelessness crisis , supporting people on benefits and trying to help save the planet with Labour Green New Deal. But hey at least your honest.


At 9:00


It’s impossible to have a sensible conversation on this if you’re going to reduce the entire private school system as entry into the Bullington club or whatever it is.

Likewise, and annoyingly for me, it stops labour being electable because they lose a ton of votes.

And just like you will think first about how your vote impacts you, before other issues that don’t directly affect you, that’s the same for everyone.

Lastly, what is the fundamental purpose of human life in a progressive country, if it isn’t the generational progression of those you love?
 
Last edited:
Instinctively parents want a better life for their children than they had. And so I find it difficult to support labours current stance on private schools and inheritance. I’m not talking about 100s of years of generational wealth, simply people who have progressed through the economic classes through hard work and good parenting.

That’s aspiring for me: people who believe they and their family can progress over time through legal endeavour and hard work.

The problem with Labours stance is it attacks the core motivation and reason for human life. And so it becomes a fundamental deal breaker for many I know, myself included.

That's the problem with egalitarianism - it comes into conflict with human nature. In regards to the education system then, it seems pretty clear to me that the decision to abolish the grammar school system in the 1960s was a huge mistake. It should've been reformed instead.
 
Last edited:
It’s impossible to have a sensible conversation on this if you’re going to reduce the entire private school system as entry into the Bullington club or whatever it is.

Likewise, and annoyingly for me, it stops labour being electable because they lose a ton of votes.

And just like you will first think about how your vote first impacts you, before other issues that don’t directly affect you, that’s the same for everyone.

Lastly, what is the fundamental purpose of human life in a progressive country of it isn’t generational advancement of those you love?
Being an economical martyr where everyone’s as pisspoor and miserable as each other. Sounds ace to me
 
You may joke, but capitalism is fundamentally built on this human behaviour. Brands being symbols of recognition etc, nowadays on steroids because of social media.

Well they are aspirational because Matalan didn't have the plum ones in my size so I've gone for the size below in the hope I'll lose some weight.
 
It's nothing to do with aspiration. People against IHT fall into two categories the offspring of well off parents (greed) or those who despise their money being taken by the state (hoarders).
So if I wanted to set aside enough so my kid could go to uni without graduating with £30k of debt I'm a hoarder?
 
But my question is when? Did benn act specify a cut off date before 23:59 on October 31st?

Else he’d be charged on November 1st, after we’d left!

Benn Act sets the date as Oct 19th for getting a deal, otherwise an extension request is required.
 
The general advancement of people with less than yourself, the forgotten people, the needy people we don't love but deserve better. Lets advance them.

You can give me half your unemployment benefit of €100k a week , you've forgotten me and you don't love me and you must have more than anyone else.
 
The general advancement of people with less than yourself, the forgotten people, the needy people we don't love but deserve better. Lets advance them.
Does that include the far right BrExit vote base?

Also isn’t that what one does by paying taxes?

Anyways probably best stop as we are derailing a thread meant to be about BrExit.
 
Last edited:
Benn Act sets the date as Oct 19th for getting a deal, otherwise an extension request is required.
Ok for it.

Thanks for clarification. So that’s the big day that the markets will also move, depending on what happens.