Donate SIGN UP
Gravatar

Answers

181 to 200 of 204rss feed

First Previous 7 8 9 10 11 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by -Talbot-. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Lol
Then let me be clear, in words of one syllable:

I did not want this plan of May's to pass. It sucked. If we stay in the E.U. then I want us to stay in as we are now, not some poor man's mode of that.

// The point is you claim that result [of the 2016 referendum] shouldn’t be accepted. //

Also, that's an equal nonsense, but we've gone over that before. So far, we have been presented with two ways of implementing the result, both of which are useless in their own way. I don't believe in leaving the EU for its own sake: if you want us to go, then explain (a) why we would be better off outside it, but, more importantly, (b) how you actually intend to achieve this in a way that does not wreck our economy or our sovereignty.
Oh, and that means detailed plans, not some guff about "fulfilling our obligations and then leaving" without even being clear what you think those obligations are.

Guff Jim. You’ve continually promoted your imaginary version of flexible democracy because it suits you to do so, and let’s not forget that immediately following the referendum, not having realised that Remainers would create such a handy fuss, you conceded that ‘Leave’ meant ‘Leave’. No need to ask what changed.
It is certainly not an imaginary version of democracy to point out that any law can be overturned, and any vote can be held again. Quite the opposite.

We disagree. That's fine. Don't misrepresent me as being anti-democracy. I am certainly not.
It becomes antidemocratic when it's an excuse to overturn a valid result. It's ok when the last result ihas been enacted and the longer term affects are evident.
-- answer removed --
The short-term effects are pretty clear, though: it has led to a dysfunctional government barely capable of dealing with anything apart from its signature policy, and in the event not even that.

The proper thing to do, then, if you wish to leave the EU, is to elect MPs and to elect a party who agree on how to achieve this. Now *that* would be a democratic way forward, instead of trampling all over how democracy has worked in this country for centuries and disregarding all the principles that define how representative democracy works.
Jim, bearing in mind your inconsistency, misrepresenting you would be some achievement.
Stop worrying Brexiteers. The cavalry is coming to sweep the entrenched, moribund, handwringer from the field.

//The huge opportunities of a clean break and a No Deal Brexit have been revealed today, with the government confirming plans to slash trade tariffs. That means cheaper goods for British consumers.
An EU exit on WTO terms would mean the British government could act unilaterally, truly taking back control. Sadly a Remainer Parliament looks set to vote down No Deal tonight, killing the UK’s negotiating hand.
Under the government’s plans, 87% of all goods would face no tariffs at all and would fall to zero. The 13% maintaining tariffs would include cars, beef and dairy in order to “support farmers and producers who have historically been protected through high EU tariffs”.
Trade Minister George Hollingbery has said: “If we leave without a deal, we will set the majority of our import tariffs to zero, while maintaining tariffs for the most sensitive industries.
“This balanced approach will help to support British jobs and avoid potential price spikes that would hit the poorest households the hardest.”
And the Department for International Trade have said: “The tariff changes mean the majority of UK households, consumers and businesses will face no additional charges on products imported from the EU.
“The new tariffs will come into force as soon as we leave the EU – only if we leave with No Deal. They will apply for up to 12 months while we consult consumers & businesses on future tariffs.”
Sounds very much like taking back control to us. It is shameful that Remainer MPs will now seek to block such an outcome.//
Naomi: Weak.

Togo: that's the second time you've copy-pasted the same thing. Falling into some bad habits.
No Jim, factual.
Haha @ 18:36
As a nation we could bite the bullet and leave and get on with the problems. We have been eating bullets since 2008 and the bankers crash.
Naomi, I can't think of a thing you've said about me or my beliefs yet that is factual. Stop pretending that your inability to understand what I think is because I'm being inconsistent.
"The proper thing to do, then, if you wish to leave the EU, is to elect MPs and to elect a party who agree on how to achieve this." Not realistic. Even ignoring that one doesn't tend to elect someone on one issue, it's near impossible for a new party to spring from nothing to a parliamentary majority. Neither of the main parties hold an overwhelming majority in favour of bringing control back home again. So that's a non-starter.

We held a referendum where parliament agreed to implement the result, got a result and should now expect parliament to deliver. That is already democracy,
Not this pandering to remainers, falling between two stools with a suggested deal that's no more than an attempt to get an anti-Brexit.
The Withdrawal Agreement was in no way pandering to Remainers though. Nothing that Theresa May has done, or continues to do, is "pandering to remainers". That you continue to insist otherwise smacks of paying no attention.
Agreed, Jim. If it had pandered to Remainers to the extent that Brietbart followers and EUSSR conspiracy theorists, as well as some reasonable Brexiters on here, try to suggest, then it should have been passed. In reality it lost because staunch Remainers and staunch Brexiteers couldn't vote for it
What’s in it for a party to pander to a minority by annoying a majority?

181 to 200 of 204rss feed

First Previous 7 8 9 10 11 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

This Deal Or No Brexit At All

Answer Question >>