UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion
General Chat - anything Goes
>
The 'Take it Outside' thread This thread will no longer be moderated ***
message 3951:
by
Michael
(new)
Jul 10, 2016 04:45AM
This made me laugh.
reply
|
flag
we might struggle to make our prediction of the outcome of a second referendum via the general election. Apart from the LibDems, and maybe the Greens, who exactly will speak for the remain supporters? Not the Tories, not UKIP, not the Labour Party in utter disarray. The SNP will try and speak to Scottish Remainers via an Independence referendum. No, any general election will not reward the voice of those who want to remain in the EU.Just like the referendum itself and with perhaps more legitimacy, a general election campaign will not be solely on the issue of Brexit.
Second referendum petition: Inquiry removes at least 77,000 fake ...www.telegraph.co.uk › News
77,000 isn't just a "small" number....... and it keeps getting reiterated that Leavers are regretting their decision ....... I haven't met any!
No, Flo, neither have I. Every single person who I know who voted out has said that after the initial shock, they are proud of what they did and, more importantly, would do it again.Strangely, some of the remainers are now saying they wished they'd voted out.
Where are all these recanting outers that everyone keeps talking about?
can I respectfully offer that your straw polls are about as reliable as those of the professional pollsters? Indubitably there are leavers who probably feel a bit sheepish about voting that way because their agenda was trying to get a different message across. but mot in your social circles, just as in mine I have seen no remainers looking to recant. But I have no doubt that the vast majority of leavers stand by their vote
The thing is, Marc, all we have is straw polls. It just surprises me how nothing has changed. People got a bit wobbly when they realised what had happened, but that has passed now and they are looking forward to a different future.There is a small vocal minority who want to go back in time and change things. They won't. They want a referendum on the terms we get from the EU. Bearing in mind that we will not begin negotiating until after the Article 50 has been triggered, how is that supposed to work? Do we vote on it and if we don't like the terms we beg to return to the EU? That means a full resubmission to the EU for membership. As we would be a new member we would have to accept the Euro and all treaties that we have opted out of in the past will be enforced.
We are, supposedly, a nation of shopkeepers - not mindreaders. Everyone seems to be deciding what other people's reasons were for Leaving or Remaining. We are individuals each with our own reasons - I wish everyone would stop lumping all the Leavers in the same boat and likewise with all the Remainers.
Nothing has changed because nothing has happened. Let's see where we are once the negotiations start and more importantly where we are once we are no longer members of the EU
T4bsF (Call me Flo) wrote: "We are, supposedly, a nation of shopkeepers - not mindreaders. Everyone seems to be deciding what other people's reasons were for Leaving or Remaining. We are individuals each with our own reasons..."
no I ascribe a whole raft of reasoning by those who voted leave. have I caught every single motive? Probably not. But I don't lump everybody together. My own reasons for voting to remain were probably out of sync with the vast majority of those who voted the same way.
No, Geoff, it's a lie, and has been widely condemned as such. All of the major Leave campaigners have disowned it. Here's an explanation of why:http://www.theguardian.com/politics/r...
We don't "send" £350 million a week to Brussels. The rebate is applied first. And that money isn't available to be spent on the NHS because we need to replace the grants that the EU have been giving to the UK. And then we need ti factor in the cost to the economy of the economic slowdown that we are heading for.
This is what the experts really said:
https://www.statisticsauthority.gov.u...
It's a lie
message 3961:
by
Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)
(last edited Jul 10, 2016 02:48PM)
(new)
No Will you are wrong, I got my information from the ONS website, not from analysis of that.Gross is gross, net is net. Simple,
What I stated above is absolutely accurate. I repeat it here.
So it is with the figure released by the ONS. The total figure is £350 million per week. The annual figure is £13 billion, from that we receive a discount of £4.5 billion. The £4.5 billion is discount that has been negotiated by the UK to receive back. However, the money coming back has strings and cannot be spent by the UK government as it pleases, it is allotted according to the EU. So although it is our money we cannot spend it as we see fit and according to our needs. It's like being given pocket money then being told that you have to put half of it in the bank and another 20% has to go to household expenses. It is what the EU dictates. It can also be changed.
Come back when you understand accounts.
More personal insults?The £350 million figure was presented as the amount the UK sends to the EU each week. It isn't. It is the theoretical amount that the UK would pay if we didn't have a rebate. We do not send £350 million a week to Europe.
It was also presented as the amount we could spend on the NHS instead if we left the EU. It isn't that either. First we have to take off the rebate, then all the grants that the UK receives from the EU, like the ones that the Welsh Assembly were demanding in the day of the referendum result. Then we have to subtract the economic cost of leaving the EU.
Everyone else has accepted that this figure was a lie. Why can't you?
I think the problem is far deeper than just Brexit, voting to leave is a symptom, and frankly very few people were swayed by the numbers. After all numbers are just things produced by politicians to get you to vote.Try How to Lie with Statistics
I think we've uncovered a fault line within society itself, and one that probably runs through most western countries
https://jandbvwebster.wordpress.com/2...
a lot of people seem to disagree on what we mean by democracy
Not quite. The £350 million figure was one of the most memorable and influential elements of the whole campaign. It was a stupid thing to say because not only is it a bare-faced lie, it tarnishes the Leave campaign permanently.
message 3965:
by
Geoff (G. Robbins) (merda constat variat altitudo)
(last edited Jul 11, 2016 01:06AM)
(new)
Are you saying that the ONS is wrong, Will? That is where the figure came from.Let me ask you a question, Will. When you go for a job, do you list your gross salary, or the amount you receive in take home pay? It is the theoretical amount that you would receive in pay if you didn't have any deductions . You never receive or see your gross salary and yet that is what you offer when you are asked at an interview.
And to use that one figure as the main reason why Leave won is a huge distortion of the truth.
And once again you you misunderstand when you are being insulted. You must have a very thin skin if you think my questioning your accounting abilities is an insult. It is an observation taken from the fact that you do not understand the difference between gross and net.
Your belief that everything is an insult is becoming quite tiresome and an obvious ploy. Please stop.
"Come back when you understand accounts."Surely you can see that that is an insult and an ad hominem attack. You do see that, don't you?
The ONS emphatically did not support the £350 million figure as it was being used. The link I gave you was very clear. The Leave campaign's use of that figure without proper context was "potentially misleading". The same was said by the Treasury Select Committee and the IFS.
When I go for a job I know that the normal taxation rules apply. No employer can change the tax regime. So the question of gross versus net does not apply. But where I would be annoyed was if my employer added an additional deduction to my salary that I could not reasonably have known about.
In the case of the £350 million, the public would not know about the rebate or whether it had been deducted or not. It was presented as if it was a net figure. The side of the battle bus said "we send 350 million to the eu every week. Let's invest in the nhs instead".
That is wholly incorrect. And yet an IPSOS Mori poll just before the election found that around half of the population believed in that number.
Yes, the number exists. £350 million means something. It is a theoretical amount which we would have to pay if we didn't have a rebate and if we didn't replace any of the grants given by the eu and if our economy didn't tank. But is is not an amount of money which could be given to the NHS instead of the EU.
Leaving the EU will almost certainly mean less money for the NHS not more. The actual amount is less on an issue.
It's a lie.
Will wrote: "Not quite. The £350 million figure was one of the most memorable and influential elements of the whole campaign. It was a stupid thing to say because not only is it a bare-faced lie, it tarnishes the Leave campaign permanently. ."Please stop getting over dramatic. This is politics. Politicians do things to the truth that would get anybody else sued.
After all Cameron lied. He said he would carry on whatever the vote. He hasn't. Has his lie tarnished the remain campaign permanently. After all those people who voted remain because they believed the remain camp offered continuity are going to feel pretty betrayed by that
Anyway you can never use the word 'permanently' about anything political. From 1000 year Reichs to empires on which the sun never sets, all is temporary.
Some political advice that is probably about three thousand years old :-)
Psalm 146:3
as a Remainer I don't feel betrayed by Cameron going. He lost a vote he staked his credibility on.
Not being over dramatic. If the UK does leave the EU, this misleading campaign will always be there as a part of the backstory to the decision. If I were a leave voter I would be acutely embarrassed by the lies that had to be told to get to this point, People will always be able to say that the referendum decision was obtained through deception.Politicians are bound by the same obligation to tell the truth that the rest of us are.
as a Remain voter I am acutely embarrassed by the shrill campaign waged by our side instead of calmly rebutting all these Leave claims. By adapting the same tone as them, we just turned people away from being interested in facts
Will wrote: ""potentially misleading"Is not a lie.
It wasn't an insult, it was advice.
Stop making it all about you.
Will wrote: "Not being over dramatic. If the UK does leave the EU, this misleading campaign will always be there as a part of the backstory to the decision. If I were a leave voter I would be acutely embarrasse..."trust me, I'm a leave voter and I am not at all embarrassed because politicians lie. They all do it. That's one reason why so many people voted leave, because they were sick of them.
My greatest embarrassment is discovering such a high proportion of my fellow citizens hold the democratic process and their fellow citizens in such contempt
Marc wrote: "as a Remain voter I am acutely embarrassed by the shrill campaign waged by our side instead of calmly rebutting all these Leave claims. By adapting the same tone as them, we just turned people away..."That's absolutely true Marc.
There was an Interesting comment by John Timpson in the Telegraph where he said that after a general election nobody has ever asked him how he voted, but now everybody is asking who voted leave or remain. That's pretty unprecedented.
He also noticed that when he's home in the north there's no fuss about it, and he thought it was no big deal, but when he went into London for meetings people wouldn't stop talking about it.
I know that I attended one meeting up here where I think the organisers were assuming all people attending would be remain and they were somewhat shocked why I spoke first and extolled the advantages I can see for the county from a Leave vote :-)
They were even more shocked when quite a lot of people agreed with me :-)
In my defence they were just too sanctimonious and I suspect Marc would have claimed to have voted leave just to puncture their aura of immense suffering heroically borne.
General elections are a regular event dominated by two parties, where everyone knows that the 'winner' has a chance of being booted out in five years time.Referendums are rare with the outcome and fallout unknown, so it's hardly surprising that people react differently.
I agree that a discussion on Britain's future post BREXIT is obviously important, that goes without saying, but Britain is on the verge of having a PM who jailed somebody for years...without charges against them...I fear civil liberties will never be the same again...
course it won't the Tories are itching to scrap the Human Rights Act
Marc wrote: "course it won't the Tories are itching to scrap the Human Rights Act"I sincerely hope they do - it will only boost Scottish independence as the Scottish parliament will refuse to concur, thus provoking a constitutional crisis, to say nothing of how Northern Ireland and the Good Friday agreement will react...
those things are going to happen anyway
I'm a leave voter, but even I can see the irony of an unelected party leader becoming PM, and the country not having a say in it for another 4 years...So much for taking sovereignty back from Brussels and giving power to the ordinary people :)
R.M.F wrote: "I'm a leave voter, but even I can see the irony of an unelected party leader becoming PM, and the country not having a say in it for another 4 years...So much for taking sovereignty back from Bru..."
we've been over this ground before, we never elect PMs and given the number of times they've changed since the war, between general elections, there's never been a rush to hold an election afterwards. One since the war, and several occasions when it didn't happen
R.M.F wrote: "I agree that a discussion on Britain's future post BREXIT is obviously important, that goes without saying, but Britain is on the verge of having a PM who jailed somebody for years...without charge..."well at least she didn't lie to get us into a war. But who was jailed without charge?
I think he probably means the Guantanamo Brits, who were of course jailed by the Yanks
I wondered if it was one of those held under the various terrorism acts
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I agree that a discussion on Britain's future post BREXIT is obviously important, that goes without saying, but Britain is on the verge of having a PM who jailed somebody for years......"Abu Qatada. Jailed for years without charge, lawyers denied access to evidence against him under the dubious claim of risks to "national security," before being finally deported to Jordan and found innocent by a Jordanian court...
Now, I couldn't give two hoots for the man, and perhaps he was guilty, but to lock somebody up without charges, for 9 years, was a shameful betrayal of British values...
yeah, not to deliver a single prison warder kicking in all that time, who'd have believed it? *satire*
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I'm a leave voter, but even I can see the irony of an unelected party leader becoming PM, and the country not having a say in it for another 4 years...So much for taking sovereignty..."
I'm well aware of the system we have in this country, but you'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at Tories who were shouting power to the people one minute, and the next minute they were urging everybody to get behind May, despite the power being denied to the people to elect May as PM.
As always with the Tories, party before country...
R.M.F wrote: "Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I agree that a discussion on Britain's future post BREXIT is obviously important, that goes without saying, but Britain is on the verge of having a PM who jailed somebody ..."Actually he was first arrested in 2002 so it's not just one home secretary
But his case was unusual in that he was held whilst fighting extradition on the grounds that it wasn't safe to return him to Jordan
In 2014 the Jordanians tried him and found him not guilty and didn't torture him, so perhaps if he'd gone back earlier he'd have saved himself being held for so long
R.M.F wrote: "JI'm well aware of the system we have in this country, but you'd have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at Tories who were shouting power to the people one minute, and the next minute they were urging everybody to get behind May, despite the power being denied to the people to elect May as PM. As always with the Tories, party before country......"
Well blame the libdems whose idea the fixed term parliament was. Changing PM isn't in law a reason for a general election under the fixed term parliament act.
Mind you, would you really want the Conservatives to call a snap election to give the new PM a mandate? Or would it be fairer to wait a year or so until there's an opposition to contest the election?
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I agree that a discussion on Britain's future post BREXIT is obviously important, that goes without saying, but Britain is on the verge of having a PM who ja..."Good point, Jim.
Jim wrote: "Or would it be fairer to wait a year or so until there's an opposition to contest the election? Another good point.
The expected coronation happens. We shouldn't be surprised. The Tory party are very good at the command and control part of politics.She had a very tough time ahead of her. The tories gave a wafer thin majority and could easily be embarrassed by a coalition of labour, lib dems, snp and disaffected tories.
She is setting herself up as a brexit leader, but she voted remain. Some leave voters won't trust her for that. And most remain voters won't support her.
Her past voting history will alienate many. She is on the right wing of the tories.
Now the civil service will prepare the grounds for a brexit which means that the leave campaign's lies will unravel still more. That will upset both leave and remain voters, as they will realise exactly what brexit means for them.
Now the tories will try to hunker down, unless they think there is a tactical advantage in engineering a snap general election with labour in disarray.
Fascinating times.
I confess it does rather amuse me. First we were told by remainers that there was no way the country could stand a long summer without a government and it was disgusting that there be an election campaign.Now we're being told that a coronation is shocking
Frankly it's getting boring. Whatever is being done is wrong, woe, woe and thrice woe.
Will wrote: "it's a lie"No Will, it is not a lie, if you read the report you quoted, it says "potentially misleading". That is not a lie. Potential, (adj), "possible when the necessary conditions exist"
Were you taken in by this claim Will?
Jim wrote: "I confess it does rather amuse me. First we were told by remainers that there was no way the country could stand a long summer without a government and it was disgusting that there be an election campaign.Now we're being told that a coronation is shocking
Frankly it's getting boring. Whatever is being done is wrong, woe, woe and thrice woe."
They are scrabbling around for excuses, Jim. They are like Canute, trying to turn back the tide.
No, I wasn't taken in by the £350 million figure. That's why it was described as "potentially misleading". Some people would be fooled by it, some wouldn't.Or are you going to tell us that you think that leaving the EU will save £350 million which could be spent on the NHS? You don't believe that, do you?
Will wrote: "That's why it was described as "potentially misleading". Some people would be fooled by it, some wouldn't."So, who do you think would be fooled by it?
An Ipsos Mori survey taken just before the referendum found that just under half of the people polled (47%) believed the £350 million figure.https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpu...
That's the problem. The leave campaign are back-tracking on a false claim that was believed by a very large proportion of the electorate - and probably the majority of the people who voted to leave.
Will wrote: "An Ipsos Mori survey taken just before the referendum found that just under half of the people polled (47%) believed the £350 million figure."We all know how bad polls have been in the past, so that's dodging the question I asked you.
And so the reversing of the Remain doom-sayers has begun:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2...
Also, now there is a new prime minister, the markets are beginning to adjust and settle, as expected. There may be further stutters, but the markets want stability.
Now, if the Labour Party get their act together, we can get on with Brexit as the electorate demanded.
UK Amazon Kindle Forum
Books mentioned in this topic
The Beiderbecke Affair (other topics)The Grain Market in the Roman Empire: A Social, Political and Economic Study (other topics)
The Peasants Are Revolting (other topics)
How to Lie with Statistics (other topics)
That Old Ace in the Hole (other topics)
More...
