Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Verbal]

Brexiter violence part 52...and some human stories behind the appalling statistics.

 

In just one edition of the Evening Standard yesterday, two examples of people being threatened and physically assaulted:

 

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-london-businesswoman-leading-legal-challenge-against-theresa-may-sent-death-threats-and-a3368756.html

 

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/i-never-thought-it-would-happen-to-me-man-kicked-by-thugs-five-days-after-brexit-a3368461.html

 

With the Home Office, Metropolitan police and other police forces all reporting an upsurge in this kind of violence after the vote, Brexiters who are honest with themselves will have to consider the company they keep. The dishonest ones will just resort to the usual abuse and violent (significantly) language.

[OldNick]

http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2016/10/14/sterling-taking-a-pounding

[ashnats]

Diane Abbott is a racist , she voted remain

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1858995/labours-shadow-health-secretary-diane-abbott-brands-the-17million-voters-who-backed-brexit-as-racists/

[buctootim]

I genuinely can't work out what May's game plan is. Is she deliberately setting it up so that the only two options are hard Brexit or remain?

 

Can't decide if she is giving Johnson, Fox and Davis total freedom to walk us right up to the precipice knowing that once people get the chance to see what leaving the EU would actually mean in terms of jobs and income they will baulk - or she really means it and wants a 'pure' exit without any messy compromise.

Edited 14 October, 2016 by buctootim

[Wes Tender]

http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2016/10/14/eus-donald-tusk-says-britain-might-yet-back-out-of-brexit

 

Tusk needs to get real and accept that hell will freeze over before we decided that we would remain in the EU after all. He says that as no member state wished to see us leave, a decision to remain in would be welcomed by all of them. However, now that the majority of the electorate voting in the Referendum want to leave the EU, it is obvious that remaining in on the basis that there would be no concessions granted to us on immigration or on the supremacy of the European Courts is unacceptable. The EU had their chance to make concessions that would have swung the vote in favour of us remaining, but they blew it. That boat has now sailed and it is futile of the gauleiters like him and Juncker imagining for one second that it is even a remote possibility. As he says, our Brexit will be a loss for all of us, but we will replace the trade we lose with the EU with new free trade deals with the rest of the World if they decide to place tariffs on us. What will be their plan B if their intransigence means that their trade with us diminishes?

 

At this early stage of the proceedings before we have even triggered Article 50, this is only bluster and posturing from both sides. The compromises will come later when the implications are examined in the cold light of day, when the most powerful business leaders have brought pressure to bear on the real decision makers in the EU.

[Wes Tender]

I genuinely can't work out what May's game plan is. Is she deliberately setting it up so that the only two options are hard Brexit or remain?

 

Can't decide if she is letting Johnson, Fox and Davis total freedom to walk us right up to the precipice knowing that once people get the chance to see what leaving the EU would actually mean in terms of jobs and income trade they will baulk - or she really means it and wants a 'pure' exit without any messy compromise.

 

The Electorate have already been told what the implications of Brexit would be; it was labelled "Project Fear" and a majority who voted decided that they wanted to Leave regardless of all the forecasts of doom and gloom, Financial Armageddon, plague of locusts, etc.

[buctootim]

a majority who voted decided that they wanted to Leave regardless of all the forecasts of doom and gloom, Financial Armageddon, plague of locusts, etc.

 

Trouble for Brexit is having a majority of those who voted leave isn't enough. Brexit needs everybody who voted leave to still want to leave regardless of how severe the economic shock will be, otherwise there is no longer a mandate and are in a minority. It only takes two people in a hundred to change their mind to reverse the vote result.

 

Anyway my point wasnt about the rights and wrongs of Brexit. It was about whether May is really a hardline Brexiteer or a Remainer playing a crafty game.

[moonraker]

Will Brexiters lease please stop saying a majority of the electorate voted to leave, they did not, only 37% of the ELECTORATE voted to leave, 35% voted to stay and 28% either could not vote, chose not to vote, or don’t care. This is the main reason I continue to argue about the outcome, it is not like a General election where FPTP allows a majority Government on a minority vote, at least we get a chance to change things every 5 years, Brexit is irreversible. Farage made this self same point himself, before he knew the outcome.

[Wes Tender]

Will Brexiters lease please stop saying a majority of the electorate voted to leave, they did not, only 37% of the ELECTORATE voted to leave, 35% voted to stay and 28% either could not vote, chose not to vote, or don’t care. This is the main reason I continue to argue about the outcome, it is not like a General election where FPTP allows a majority Government on a minority vote, at least we get a chance to change things every 5 years, Brexit is irreversible. Farage made this self same point himself, before he knew the outcome.

 

the majority of the electorate voting in the Referendum want to leave the EU

 

Will you please attempt to read and comprehend what is written before going off half-cock? I'll retaliate with a bugbear of my own from the Remainians. They ask why we would want to turn our backs on a market of just over 500 million people, when 65 million of those are us. We should not be included, but a round 500 million sounds a lot better than 442 million.

[Wes Tender]

Trouble for Brexit is having a majority of those who voted leave isn't enough. Brexit needs everybody who voted leave to still want to leave regardless of how severe the economic shock will be, otherwise there is no longer a mandate and are in a minority. It only takes two people in a hundred to change their mind to reverse the vote result.

 

Anyway my point wasnt about the rights and wrongs of Brexit. It was about whether May is really a hardline Brexiteer or a Remainer playing a crafty game.

 

You're talking gibberish. The biggest popular vote in history is all the mandate that the Government needs. The only way to determine whether there has been a sea change of opinion would be another referendum, which isn't going to happen.

 

Live in hope with your peculiar conspiracy theory if it comforts you. I believe that May played a very astute game keeping her head down during the Referendum and now she is happy to ride the populist Brexit wave that will secure her place in British political history, just as Cameron and Osborne will be not be treated kindly for the part they played.

[buctootim]

You're talking gibberish. The biggest popular vote in history is all the mandate that the Government needs. The only way to determine whether there has been a sea change of opinion would be another referendum, which isn't going to happen.

 

Live in hope with your peculiar conspiracy theory if it comforts you. I believe that May played a very astute game keeping her head down during the Referendum and now she is happy to ride the populist Brexit wave that will secure her place in British political history, just as Cameron and Osborne will be not be treated kindly for the part they played.

 

I've belatedly realised there isn't any point in engaging with you. Most other people on this thread are able to think about the issues and discuss. You're like one of those kid's dolls where you pull the string out and it says one of five stock phrases.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Will Brexiters lease please stop saying a majority of the electorate voted to leave, they did not, only 37% of the ELECTORATE voted to leave, 35% voted to stay and 28% either could not vote, chose not to vote, or don’t care. This is the main reason I continue to argue about the outcome, it is not like a General election where FPTP allows a majority Government on a minority vote, at least we get a chance to change things every 5 years, Brexit is irreversible. Farage made this self same point himself, before he knew the outcome.

 

What a load of pony .

 

Perhaps people who didn't vote were happy to let others decide their fate . Perhaps they didn't care .

 

If this was such a big deal it was for the Remain Government & Parliament to put a threshold into the referendum act , they did not . They were happy to accept that the will of the majority who voted would prevail . It's only sad sack remoaners who keep banging on and on about this . You lost , man up about it and accept it.

 

Like Nige did you can now campaign to change our minds . We can have another vote to rejoin in 40 years.

Edited 14 October, 2016 by Lord Duckhunter

[egg]

I've read through this thread and wish I hadn't!

 

The outcome of the brexit vote was clear. Brexit won. Some will like that and others won't. Either way, the vote had given the government to press the article 50 button and brexit. There's a need to do that by 31/3 otherwise we surrender more of our sovereignty hence that is the deadline.

 

This 'but only x % of the electorate only voted brexit' argument is utter ******. This ain't the playground where you lose paper, scissor, stone and protest that you should get another chance. This is a grown up democracy. Of those who got off their backside and voted the bulk said leave in an election without a vote or majority threshold. The rules have been compiled with and you can't change them after the event.

 

With everything said, and as a brexiter, the fall out and likely problems going forward makes me question whether my decision was sensible. However, me and millions of others made the same (possibly wrong) decision but we made it and we've gotta implement it. It could be a nightmare but hey ho.

[moonraker]

What a load of pony .

 

Perhaps people who didn't vote were happy to let others decide their fate . Perhaps they didn't care .

 

If this was such a big deal it was for the Remain Government & Parliament to put a threshold into the referendum act , they did not . They were happy to accept that the will of the majority who voted would prevail . It's only sad sack remoaners who keep banging on and on about this . You lost , man up about it and accept it.

 

Like Nige did you can now campaign to change our minds . We can have another vote to rejoin in 40 years.

Bottom line whatever else applied it was not a binding referendum, despite breakfast means something, with only 37 % support if it were ignored democracy would not be abused.

[Fan The Flames]

Will you please attempt to read and comprehend what is written before going off half-cock? I'll retaliate with a bugbear of my own from the Remainians. They ask why we would want to turn our backs on a market of just over 500 million people, when 65 million of those are us. We should not be included, but a round 500 million sounds a lot better than 442 million.

 

Hang on a minute 500 - 65 isn't 442, something fishy is going on, you are not to be trusted.

[Batman]

Bottom line whatever else applied it was not a binding referendum, despite breakfast means something, with only 37 % support if it were ignored democracy would not be abused.

 

its happening.

Just accept it

 

it will be a rocky road for the next 2 years or so. The Guardian etc will spell out doom and gloom, The mail etc will have another slant from the opposite side

MPs will do the same

 

but all this 'not binding' waffle is just pointless.

[Wes Tender]

Hang on a minute 500 - 65 isn't 442, something fishy is going on, you are not to be trusted.

 

If you researched it properly, you would find out that I was being generous to the EU position for a change. Of course the EU population of 500 million exactly is far too convenient, but is used as a sound-bite. It is actually 7 million or so more, hence 507 million less 65 million = the 442 million. No doubt had I used the 500 million, some smart Alec would have pulled me up on it.

[Wes Tender]

I've belatedly realised there isn't any point in engaging with you. Most other people on this thread are able to think about the issues and discuss. You're like one of those kid's dolls where you pull the string out and it says one of five stock phrases.

 

Ironic really that the two points you raised are new ones as far as I can see, especially this bizarre May conspiracy theory of yours. But otherwise the obvious response to your objection about repetitive replies, is to suggest that if you rake over the same old coals, you shouldn't be surprised to receive the same reactions.

[Johnny Bognor]

Bottom line whatever else applied it was not a binding referendum, despite breakfast means something, with only 37 % support if it were ignored democracy would not be abused.

 

Bottom line is only 42% of the electorate voted to join the common market in the first place. By your reckoning, we shouldn't even be in it.

 

0% voted to join the EU, when we were promised referendums, flyig in the face if democracy.

 

So as by your reckoning, we shouldn't have been in it in the first place, why are you complaining now?

Edited 15 October, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[Guided Missile]

So much for the EU/Canadian trade deal, reported in this mornings Times here.

 

The regional parliament of Wallonia voted heavily yesterday against the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (Ceta), which took seven years to negotiate.The deal to break down tariffs and other barriers to trade between the EU and Canada requires the unanimous approval of all 28 members of the bloc. But for Belgium to ratify the deal all five of its regional and language-group parliaments must approve it.

Jean Claude-Juncker had previously said that the “credibility of Europe’s trade policy” was at stake and exasperated Canadian leaders have said the deal’s failure would repudiate the EU’s ability to strike deals with everyone.

[shurlock]

So much for the EU/Canadian trade deal, reported in this mornings Times here.

 

Exactly. And to think the ingenues on here looked to Canada deal's with the EU as a model for Brexit. Some panacea, right pal

[Wes Tender]

So much for the EU/Canadian trade deal, reported in this mornings Times here.

 

If the mighty EU cannot push over the line a free trade deal with Canada in 7 years and counting, just think how long it would take little old us to achieve that.

 

I reckon we'd achieve it in under two years. Unless one of our Counties votes it down, that is.

[Johnny Bognor]

Exactly. And to think the ingenues on here looked to Canada deal's with the EU as a model for Brexit. Some panacea, right pal

 

Yes those Canadians are so difficult to get on with, they can't agree on anything. So glad we have the EU negotiating on our behalf ?

[shurlock]

If the mighty EU cannot push over the line a free trade deal with Canada in 7 years and counting, just think how long it would take little old us to achieve that.

 

I reckon we'd achieve it in under two years. Unless one of our Counties votes it down, that is.

 

Good to see you missing the wood for the trees once again Les.

[Verbal]

Yes those Canadians are so difficult to get on with, they can't agree on anything. So glad we have the EU negotiating on our behalf ?

 

Your first sentence is actually correct. The EU negotiators were the speedsters. It was the Canadians who dragged their feet, largely because of regional issues (think Scotland and N Ireland with our negotiations, whenever we get round to, you know, actually having a plan).

 

CETA tells us a great deal about how thing will go. As will the Swiss climbdown.

[Johnny Bognor]

Your first sentence is actually correct. The EU negotiators were the speedsters. It was the Canadians who dragged their feet, largely because of regional issues (think Scotland and N Ireland with our negotiations, whenever we get round to, you know, actually having a plan).

 

CETA tells us a great deal about how thing will go. As will the Swiss climbdown.

 

I agree. The EU are fantastic negotiators. Just look at their track record. Speaks for itself

 

The key to their success is how they get all 28 members to agree to everything and how no individual states ever block anything.

 

Quite remarkable don't you think???

Edited 15 October, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[Guided Missile]

The deal to break down tariffs and other barriers to trade between the EU and Canada requires the unanimous approval of all 28 members of the bloc. But for Belgium to ratify the deal all five of its regional and language-group parliaments must approve it.

I'm all for a "Hard Brexit" which is inevitable, given the text in bold. Who thinks we would have been better off having the EU negotiating our trade deals is mental....

[shurlock]

I agree. The EU are fantastic negotiators. Just look at their track record. Speaks for itself

 

The key to their success is how they get all 28 members to agree to everything and how no individual states ever block anything.

 

Quite remarkable don't you think???

 

As the UK is about to find out when the shoe is on the other foot, right Baldrick.

 

Thankfully the UK has a plan to enjoy the benefits of trade with the EU and precedents from which to draw reassurance -just like CETA which David Davis called the perfect starting point for the UK's discussions with the Commission or Bojo termed as an example for the UK to follow, heralding a very, very bright future.

 

Whoops...

Edited 15 October, 2016 by shurlock

[shurlock]

I'm all for a "Hard Brexit" which is inevitable, given the text in bold. Who thinks we would have been better off having the EU negotiating our trade deals is mental....

 

In the real world, there are things called trade-offs, pal. Costs and benefits. The flipside of the messiness and grind of having to secure internal agreement between members is the external leverage and muscle that comes with being able to negotiate as a bloc. One goes with the other. Brexiters would come across as a little less dim and naive if they acknowledged both sides of the ledger.

Edited 15 October, 2016 by shurlock

[Wes Tender]

Good to see you missing the wood for the trees once again Les.

 

Typical of you Shorluck, to dismiss an opinion with a snide remark, rather than bothering to refute it with any sort of reasoned counter argument, or structured rebuttal.

 

I expect that it's your strategy equivalent of this:-

 

[Guided Missile]

In the real world, there are things called trade-offs, pal. Costs and benefits. The flipside of the messiness and grind of having to secure internal agreement between members is the external leverage and muscle that comes with being able to negotiate as a bloc. One goes with the other. Brexiters would come across as a little less dim and naive if they acknowledged both sides of the ledger.

So, pal, you think it is a benefit to have the regional parliament of Wallonia in a position to veto a trade deal that the other member states want. You probably think the Soviet Union was a good idea. Look how that turned out, pal...

[Johnny Bognor]

I'm all for a "Hard Brexit" which is inevitable, given the text in bold. Who thinks we would have been better off having the EU negotiating our trade deals is mental....

I disagree.

 

If your objective is to not have any trade deals with any of the world's top 10 economies (outside of the EU), then the EU negotiating team is quite brilliant

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[shurlock]

Typical of you Shorluck, to dismiss an opinion with a snide remark, rather than bothering to refute it with any sort of reasoned counter argument, or structured rebuttal.

 

I expect that it's your strategy equivalent of this:-

 

 

Les, given you and others all sing from the same six-fingered hymn-sheet, my 'structured rebuttal' should be pretty clear from my other posts. Sorry for not addressing you personally, though pal - one might say it's an occupational hazard of having to negotiate with many members.

[shurlock]

So, pal, you think it is a benefit to have the regional parliament of Wallonia in a position to veto a trade deal that the other member states want. You probably think the Soviet Union was a good idea. Look how that turned out, pal...

 

So from being virulently undemocratic, the EU is now too democratic in your eyes

 

Not sure why you dredged up the Soviet Union - probably says more about you and your own flights of fancy than the case at hand.

Edited 15 October, 2016 by shurlock

[Johnny Bognor]

Les, given you and others all sing from the same six-fingered hymn-sheet, my 'structured rebuttal'[emoji38]should be pretty clear from my other posts. Sorry for not addressing you personally, though pal - one might say it's an occupational hazard of having to negotiate with many members.

 

That's right Wes. The poor fella has only just recovered from being dunked yesterday over the 3000 job cuts at lloyds (where the decision to cut them was made BEFORE the referendum), so give him a break FFS

[shurlock]

That's right Wes. The poor fella has only just recovered from being dunked yesterday over the 3000 job cuts at lloyds (where the decision to cut them was made BEFORE the referendum), so give him a break FFS

 

Not sure what you're talking about - think you're referring to someone else. I didnt weigh in on the specifics of the Lloyds case, just made a general observation about your dismissal of contrary evidence as being tainted by money and special favours - a bizarro little ditty youve rolled out time and time again.

[buctootim]

...

Edited 15 October, 2016 by buctootim
Shurlock already made that point

[Johnny Bognor]

...

 

Best post from you in a while, to be fair

 

Does each dot represent each one of the three donuts?

Edited 15 October, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[Johnny Bognor]

Not sure what you're talking about - think you're referring to someone else. I didnt weigh in on the specifics of the Lloyds case, just made a general observation about your dismissal of contrary evidence as being tainted by money and special favours - a bizarro little ditty youve rolled out time and time again.

 

Errrrrr you declared game set and match before I delivered the killer blow and dunked the donuts. You were wrong.

[Winnersaint]

Errrrrr you declared game set and match before I delivered the killer blow and dunked the donuts. You were wrong.

 

What is it with you people what are you trying to prove? "Killer blows", "Donuts", All a necessary part of a debate? Or just plain insulting bullying? Your side won. The mandate of the electorate regrettably, but most importantly democratically must be upheld. Why the crowing? Between you, WT and Dickhunter you seek to come on here and belittle those who disagree with you. Can only hope if the economy does go tits up as a result of Brexit then there might be a pegging back of some of the rhetoric on here, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Sour Mash]

What is it with you people what are you trying to prove? "Killer blows", "Donuts", All a necessary part of a debate? Or just plain insulting bullying? Your side won. The mandate of the electorate regrettably, but most importantly democratically must be upheld. Why the crowing? Between you, WT and Dickhunter you seek to come on here and belittle those who disagree with you. Can only hope if the economy does go tits up as a result of Brexit then there might be a pegging back of some of the rhetoric on here, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

You've got to be kidding? I assume you haven't actually read this thread. Plenty of stick going back and forth from both sides, all part of any debate on a contentious subject on here.

[Johnny Bognor]

What is it with you people what are you trying to prove? "Killer blows", "Donuts", All a necessary part of a debate? Or just plain insulting bullying? Your side won. The mandate of the electorate regrettably, but most importantly democratically must be upheld. Why the crowing? Between you, WT and Dickhunter you seek to come on here and belittle those who disagree with you. Can only hope if the economy does go tits up as a result of Brexit then there might be a pegging back of some of the rhetoric on here, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

 

Errrrrr two pints was trying to give it the big one how 3000 jobs were lost as a result of brexit. It was wrong and needed challenging. I got ridiculed for doing so and took personal insults. So excuse me for wanting to rub a few noses in it.

 

As for bullying, I was standing up for myself against the three donuteers. The bullies lost on this occasion. Which is a moral victory I take some pleasure in. The "little man" won against golliath.

 

The plain arrogance and intellectual snobbery displayed from remainers is in poor taste and i will continue to challenge them.

 

Many a remainer seems to blame everything bad or negative on brexit, like there's never been any bad news before.

 

I would go even further and say many remainers are hoping for and want the UK to fail, just to say I told you so.... I want the UK to succeed, in or out. That's the difference.

Edited 15 October, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[Saint86]

If you researched it properly, you would find out that I was being generous to the EU position for a change. Of course the EU population of 500 million exactly is far too convenient, but is used as a sound-bite. It is actually 7 million or so more, hence 507 million less 65 million = the 442 million. No doubt had I used the 500 million, some smart Alec would have pulled me up on it.

 

Have you added the somalians, pakistanis etc.... sorry i mean Syrians, no wait, they aren't from syria!!!

[Plastic]

The poor fella has only just recovered from being dunked yesterday over the 3000 job cuts at lloyds

 

This is probably the most pathetic 'point scoring' post I've seen on here.

Your hilarious 'donut dunking' comment has been wheeled out so many times that it's actually a bit embarrassing to read now. You need a new joke mate.

Oh yes, and that's 3000 people losing their jobs. 3000 people who may struggle to pay their mortgage. 3000 'dunked donuts', you facetious twát.

[shurlock]

This is probably the most pathetic 'point scoring' post I've seen on here.

Your hilarious 'donut dunking' comment has been wheeled out so many times that it's actually a bit embarrassing to read now. You need a new joke mate.

Oh yes, and that's 3000 people losing their jobs. 3000 people who may struggle to pay their mortgage. 3000 'dunked donuts', you facetious twát.

 

Poor old Baldrick has been royally taken to the cleaners on this thread -recent highlights include poor Richard Branson analogies, a basic misunderstanding of the concept of productivity and championing the benefits of sterlings fall, even as the UK's trade deficit continues to widen. Never mind the all-time classic how the UK is meaningfully going to diversify its exports within a time frame so unrealistic that even my dog would wince -all to secure leverage to negotiate a better deal.

 

Spare him a few crumbs of comfort even if he has to make things up in the process.

[shurlock]

Shorluck, me old mucker, I'm sure that you will be happy to furnish me with the source of these statistics and on what basis of comparison they were made. What exactly were they comparing? Are we talking comparisons of all sources of income which constitute GDP, just the manufacturing base, or including the service industry sector?

 

Regarding wage level comparisons, again what are we comparing in terms of occupations and are we talking gross salary or net?

 

Pardon my scepticism, but the source of the statistics that Tim posted is very much in bed with the Remain camp and the EU and it is often the case that statistical information can easily be skewed to suit a particular position. Also, it is a well known fact that 75.3% of statistics are just made up.

 

Just saw this Les

 

Labour productivity - output per hour worked, a standard, uncontroversial measure of productivity. It was commonly used and accepted before Brexit and it will be commonly used and accepted after it.

 

From your babbling "all sources of income which constitute GDP" - it appears you don't have a clue what you're talking about and just making noise to throw people off the scent.

 

Yes the UK trails major peers -nobody contests that whatever their political views or allegiances, pal.

[John B]

Tusk needs to get real and accept that hell will freeze over before we decided that we would remain in the EU after all. He says that as no member state wished to see us leave, a decision to remain in would be welcomed by all of them. However, now that the majority of the electorate voting in the Referendum want to leave the EU, it is obvious that remaining in on the basis that there would be no concessions granted to us on immigration or on the supremacy of the European Courts is unacceptable. The EU had their chance to make concessions that would have swung the vote in favour of us remaining, but they blew it. That boat has now sailed and it is futile of the gauleiters like him and Juncker imagining for one second that it is even a remote possibility. As he says, our Brexit will be a loss for all of us, but we will replace the trade we lose with the EU with new free trade deals with the rest of the World if they decide to place tariffs on us. What will be their plan B if their intransigence means that their trade with us diminishes?

 

At this early stage of the proceedings before we have even triggered Article 50, this is only bluster and posturing from both sides. The compromises will come later when the implications are examined in the cold light of day, when the most powerful business leaders have brought pressure to bear on the real decision makers in the EU.

 

He is stating the bleeding obvious out means out

 

I thought people like you wanted out and nothing to do with the EU as things would be great outside but the Bank of England governor Mark Carney warns food prices will rise

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney says those on lower incomes will be hit as inflation forces prices up after the referendum so things dont look that good now

[Johnny Bognor]

This is probably the most pathetic 'point scoring' post I've seen on here.

Your hilarious 'donut dunking' comment has been wheeled out so many times that it's actually a bit embarrassing to read now. You need a new joke mate.

Oh yes, and that's 3000 people losing their jobs. 3000 people who may struggle to pay their mortgage. 3000 'dunked donuts', you facetious twát.

 

Errrr who brought up the 3000 job losses to make a political point, which turned out to be false????? You know, 'used' people who were losing their jobs and could not pay their mortgages??? Delighting in the fact that people were losing their jobs thanks to brexit, so that Brexiters could be blamed for something???

 

As i explained, the cuts were made to take account of the way we now do our banking. So unless you only use cash, cheques and the bank tellers, you are part of the problem. In fact, the increased use of technology everywhere is destroying jobs, so unless you're a techno phobe, you might want to take a hard long look in the mirror.

 

As we're talking about jobs and the EU, what are your thoughts on the tens of millions of young people unemployed, thanks to the political obsession with the Euro and the eventual march towards the european super state?? The prospects for youngsters across the southern states is pretty bleak... this point seems to have passed the remainers by.

 

Anyway, as I have stated many times, I want the UK to prosper, in or out, unlike many remainers who simply want the UK to fail, just to be proved right. Sounds pretty facetious to me. Oh and in failing, that means people losing their jobs and struggling to pay their mortgages. Are you one of those types???

Edited 16 October, 2016 by Johnny Bognor

[Wes Tender]

Just saw this Les

 

Labour productivity - output per hour worked, a standard, uncontroversial measure of productivity. It was commonly used and accepted before Brexit and it will be commonly used and accepted after it.

 

From your babbling "all sources of income which constitute GDP" - it appears you don't have a clue what you're talking about and just making noise to throw people off the scent.

 

Yes the UK trails major peers -nobody contests that whatever their political views or allegiances, pal.

 

Come on then, Shorluck, me old mucker, answer my question and furnish me with the source of the figures. It was a simple request, so it shouldn't have been a problem for somebody of the intellect you assume yourself to have.

[Wes Tender]

He is stating the bleeding obvious out means out

 

I thought people like you wanted out and nothing to do with the EU as things would be great outside but the Bank of England governor Mark Carney warns food prices will rise

Bank of England Governor Mark Carney says those on lower incomes will be hit as inflation forces prices up after the referendum so things dont look that good now

 

The reason I challenged the Tusk article is precisely that he doesn't understand that out means out. Otherwise, why would he think that there was even the remotest possibility that we might yet decide to remain in the EU?

 

And wind in your neck with this "people like you" arrogance, because you are looking down your nose at over half of the electorate who voted to leave the EU.What happens to food prices remains to be seen and Mark Carney should get on with his job and deal with situations like inflation if and when they occur, rather than speculating on things that might not happen.