Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

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


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Just checked and was per week, but UK contribute to EU 13 billions and got back 4.5 last year so still a bit of money.

That's nothing on a national accounts scale. 0.3% of GDP, 1.1% of government budget if I assume government is 30% of budget (which I imagine is higher).
 
No I am not. You are missing the point - By definition, it can not be informed, because the information doesn't yet exist - What kind of deal will UK negotiate with EU for the exist?

Hell, what is the proposed deal they intend to negotiate for an exit? Nothing has been negotiated even among the leave parties. Only ideas thrown out there.

None of this has been formulated yet. Though, if I were to insult someone, it is a bit thick to claim to be informed about information yet to be formulated (this is btw, a classic trait of lacking intelligence). bite. bite.

Which is why it would have made better sense to make it a two-stage referendum, so the people could also vote on whether the deal they will actually end up with is also the deal they want to end up with.
In other words you want a second referendum to ask people to vote on the exit deal.
 
This is why you vote for Governments to decide for you, issues as specific and with deeper implications as this shouldn't be decided through a referendum, imo.

But people vote those governments into power so the effect is the same.

Bottom line is, everyone who has a right to vote, gets to exercise it. And one side effect is the consequences of the vote whether for a referendum or for a representative to serve in Congress or Parliament can have long lasting effects well beyond the immediate future of that vote.
 
He did it because:

1) He thought it would counter the threat from UKIP and quell growing backbench grumbles in his own party.

2) He never really thought it would happen; a Conservative majority at the last election was a low-probability outcome and the Lib Dems would have blocked any referendum in coalition.

None of this had anything to do with giving "the people" their voice, it was a high-stakes political gamble that backfired and Cameron has paid for his own recklessness.
Still the right thing to do.
 
I'm guessing you read only the last post because I already "fixed" those numbers and again if someone doesn't have the same opinion of the liberal/socialists we are trolls, idiots. You guys need to let the USSR ideology to go.

Quite. And if you're not a troll you're branded xenophobic, racist, an idiot etc. This from supposedly left wing, free thinking, socialist, anti-xenophobic/anti-racist people - the irony is amazing!

There's a reason why the Caf political polls aren't as representative as the real life results and it's not because the Caf is all inclusive, rather the opposite.
 
I'm guessing you read only the last post because I already "fixed" those numbers and again if someone doesn't have the same opinion of the liberal/socialists we are trolls, idiots. You guys need to let the USSR ideology to go.

I honestly assumed you were being facetious. I thought everyone knew those stats were absolutely bogus and simplistic.

But no, it is not communist to counteract opinion with fact. It is however, a classic fascist trait to try to drag factual discernment down to the level of mere opinion.
 
It makes fine sense. Denmark initially voted 'no' to the EU. With a different plan on the table, that changed to 'yes' a year later.

They would negotiate on the premise that the UK has signalled a clear intention of its wish to leave.

There is no such thing as closure in politics. You think 'leave' will give closure to the UK? The fallout will last decades.
Like I said in an edit: what they should have done is make absolutely clear what 'Leave' means. Not in the sense of the terms the EU can offer but what the British government will do. A clear, detailed plan should have been made: if 'Leave' wins, Cameron will immediately trigger Article 50 and begin negotiations. Right now the situation is that nobody knows what's going to happen and when.

A two-staged referendum would mean years of total uncertainty. After all, Tusk and co. already warned that negotiations could take 7-8 years.
 
Like I said in an edit: what they should have done is make absolutely clear what 'Leave' means. Not in the sense of the terms the EU can offer but what the British government will do. A clear, detailed plan should have been made: if 'Leave' wins, Cameron will immediately trigger Article 50 and begin negotiations. Right now the situation is that nobody knows what's going to happen and when.

A two-staged referendum would mean years of total uncertainty. After all, Tusk and co. already warned that negotiations could take 7-8 years.

It can not. Article 50 stipulates that once triggered, you will be exited no matter what after two years.
 
A general idea? On leave campaign literature I have seen, I've read that we spend £350m per week on the EU, that most of our immigration comes from the EU, that the EU control ALL our laws, that the EU controls ALL our borders, and the fact that Turkey are definitely about to join.

All of the above are 100% not true... so how is this a general idea?.

There are lots of reasons to leave the EU but none of them were even part of the general referendum discourse. Amazing really.
 
Quite. And if you're not a troll you're branded xenophobic, racist, an idiot etc. This from supposedly left wing, free thinking, socialist anti xenophobic/racist people - the irony is amazing!

There's a reason why the Caf political polls aren't as representative as the real life results and it's not because the Caf is all inclusive, rather the opposite.

If that sounds hostile to you then let me assure you the mood is worse at the continent. I pity the fool who will conduct the trade deals Britain need with the EU. It won't be nice
 
I'm guessing you read only the last post because I already "fixed" those numbers and again if someone doesn't have the same opinion of the liberal/socialists we are trolls, idiots. You guys need to let the USSR ideology to go.
Farage has already said this number was a 'mistake'. He obviously lied to everyone and didn't take into account anything (currency crashing, quite a big chance of increasing unemployment as some companies will leave UK etc...).
 
European countries aren't the world players they used to be now we have mega countries if we compare them with any European country besides Russia.
Germany, France, Great Britain and Italy are all bigger economies than Russia and only smaller than USA, China and Japan. You should just stop making a fool of your self now as it's clear you have no clue what your talking about.
 
I'm leaving this thread and I will be back in a few years to yell on your face - I TOLD YOU!!!!! :devil: I want England and Wales to go to the euro final just because of their courage.

*Hm...derp, I've nothing substantial to bolster my opinion and better bail out before it is getting too embarassing. But but if all turns out yummy...in a few years maybe...then I'll be back, yesyes*:lol:
 
We are not allowing you feckers in our non EU space without implementing our demands.
 
It was bad enough with Mrs T - wait 'til we getta load of Mr T.

:lol:

Seriously guys you're screwed. Malta's PM described leaving the EU as a suicide and we're in your friend list.
 
In a few years when UK turns to be better than now I can see more countries leaving the union, UK will save 350 million of pounds a day and right there is a big plus.
:lol:
 
That would be difficult. Could end up with referendum after referendum until we like the deal.

I doubt it. This is where leadership plays a part. Set the frames properly, make it clear what you are voting for - that if the first referendum goes through, it is to be expected that the 2nd will also and that negotiations will happen on this basis. Make clear what possible outcomes there can be for the 2nd referendum before the 1st one is even made. Make it clear that there will be no 3rd referendum.

Your politicians don't even know when you intend to trigger article 50 or what specific terms you hope to get out of it. This referendum looks more like an opinion poll than an actual vote. Except its binding.
 
It can not. Article 50 stipulates that once triggered, you will be exited no matter what after two years.
If negotiations regarding the shared market and trade regulations do not end in that timeframe, the World Trade Organisation rules will automatically apply to Britain after the exit which indeed does have to happen within two years unless all 27 EU member states agree to an extension.

Which is another reason why this was monumentally stupid.
 
The most surprising is Wales voting to leave. They gain the most from the UE, alongside Northern Ireland.
 
I work in finance, we just had this email...



And now Morgan Stanley are denying the reports about the movement of their investment bankers. I think some people are just seeing doom and gloom and jumping the gun without allowing things to settle down.

What do you expect them to say?

"The company is going down the tubes, run for your lives!"
 
The most surprising is Wales voting to leave. They gain the most from the UE, alongside Northern Ireland.
My Nan had new windows and a new kitchen because of EU funding; today, she's living in a tent (without windows).
 
What do you expect them to say?

"The company is going down the tubes, run for your lives!"

Read the thread, it was more about the fact that most companies will have already conducted risk assessments, markets have already recovered, most international companies work without boarders. The fear mongering and panic by the Caf is staggering.

But we've already discussed that post and I've no desire to repeat myself...
 
The most surprising is Wales voting to leave. They gain the most from the UE, alongside Northern Ireland.

Addendum - they gain the most from EU, out of any country in the EU. Instead they've put themselves in the hands of a London tory government.

It's like a darwin award nomination.