advertisement


Vast Brexit thread merge part VI

DonQuixote99 said:
Voters are under no obligation to think according to your logic, and can vote any way while accepting anything or nothing. As you admitted above, the most you can say is the SHOULD have understood this or that, again according to your logic. So your claim that the masses desired what you say fails.
Click to expand...
What a ridiculous post.

I haven’t made any claims regarding what the masses desired, that’s the remainers thinking they can read the mind of others. I’ve stated the fact of what was on the ballot paper. I suggest you look it up on the web.
 
Brian said:
What a ridiculous post.

I haven’t made any claims regarding what the masses desired, that’s the remainers thinking they can read the mind of others. I’ve stated the fact of what was on the ballot paper. I suggest you look it up on the web.
Click to expand...

This after Brian seemed to think that all 17.4 m Leave voters voted for No Deal. Oh the irony.
 
TheDecameron said:
Do you live in a silent order?
Click to expand...

That reminds me of a funny comment from the bass player in band I play with - I was at a rehearsal and the clarinet player announced he couldn't make next week's rehearsal because he was going on a week's silent retreat. Without hesitating the bass player said "Oh, say hi to everyone from me". Boom-tish.
 
Brian said:
You’ll never get it, but here’s a question for you. What was on the ballot paper?
Click to expand...

Leave The EU or Remain in the EU. There was nothing more more specific than that, therefore it is impossible to say what sort of Leave people voted for. To claim that all who voted leave voted for No Deal is spurious at best and at worst is insulting to Leavers by the implications of that statement.
 
Nick_G said:
Leave The EU or Remain in the EU. There was nothing more more specific than that, therefore it is impossible to say what sort of Leave people voted for. To claim that all who voted leave voted for No Deal is spurious at best and at worst is insulting to Leavers by the implications of that statement.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: There is nothing insulting in what I said. You’re going to have to try harder than that for a diversion.

I made no claim. I stated what was on the ballot paper, and that is what people voted for. Seems you know what was on the paper but you don’t understand what it means. It means not a single person who opted for ‘Leave the EU’ did so in the expectation of any specific deal. There was no such thing on offer, a specific deal is what is being offered by Labour NOW in a GE campaign, 3 1/2 years later.

How could someone who voted leave and wanted a Norway deal ( for example ) have voted for that deal? How could someone who voted leave and wanted a Canada deal ( for example ) have voted for that deal? Obviously, they could not, yet they voted leave anyway. So what are you claiming such people were expecting when they voted leave because it certainly was not a Norway or Canada deal, per the example. Those choices did not exist.

Voters may have hoped for a certain outcome when voting leave but they did not vote for their preferred outcome, they did not have the opportunity. Uncomfortable truth when you’re straw clutching but the truth nonetheless. Help enable a Labour GE win if you want such a choice.
 
Brian said:
What a ridiculous post.

I haven’t made any claims regarding what the masses desired, that’s the remainers thinking they can read the mind of others. I’ve stated the fact of what was on the ballot paper. I suggest you look it up on the web.
Click to expand...
Piffle.
 
Brian said:
:rolleyes: There is nothing insulting in what I said. You’re going to have to try harder than that for a diversion.

I made no claim. I stated what was on the ballot paper, and that is what people voted for. Seems you know what was on the paper but you don’t understand what it means. It means not a single person who opted for ‘Leave the EU’ did so in the expectation of any specific deal. There was no such thing on offer, a specific deal is what is being offered by Labour NOW in a GE campaign, 3 1/2 years later.

How could someone who voted leave and wanted a Norway deal ( for example ) have voted for that deal? How could someone who voted leave and wanted a Canada deal ( for example ) have voted for that deal? Obviously, they could not, yet they voted leave anyway. So what are you claiming such people were expecting when they voted leave because it certainly was not a Norway or Canada deal, per the example. Those choices did not exist.

Voters may have hoped for a certain outcome when voting leave but they did not vote for their preferred outcome, they did not have the opportunity. Uncomfortable truth when you’re straw clutching but the truth nonetheless. Help enable a Labour GE win if you want such a choice.
Click to expand...
Your clear point is that a vote for leave was a vote for any deal or no deal. Or will you tell us now that you made no point?
 
DonQuixote99 said:
Your clear point is that a vote for leave was a vote for any deal or no deal. Or will you tell us now that you made no point?
Click to expand...
Who is ‘us’?

Not only can’t I read the mind of 17.4m people and claim I know what type of leave deal they preferred, I also can’t read the mind of the 48% who voted remain and the type of remain they preferred the UK pursue ( eg ever closer Union, areas of EU reform, should there be an EU Army etc ). People who voted to ‘Remain In The EU’ voted simply to remain in the EU and nothing else, it’s all that was possible in that ballot.

None of it is relevant. The meaning of either option on that ballot paper is obvious. Remain or Leave.
 
620.jpg
 
Sorry if this has been covered.

Moody's (Credit Ratings Agency) have changed their outlook on the UK's Aa2 rating from stable to negative. Commentary was pretty damning, siting an erosion in institutional strength that's likely to remain for some time to come given the inevitably contentious nature of the negotiations with the EU. They're not very impressed with the abandonment of fiscal responsibility from the main parties and the erratic and significant spending promises given that there's no plan to increase revenues to finance the spending.
 
jay said:
Sorry if this has been covered.

Moody's (Credit Ratings Agency) have changed their outlook on the UK's Aa2 rating from stable to negative. Commentary was pretty damning, siting an erosion in institutional strength that's likely to remain for some time to come given the inevitably contentious nature of the negotiations with the EU. They're not very impressed with the abandonment of fiscal responsibility from the main parties and the erratic and significant spending promises given that there's no plan to increase revenues to finance the spending.
Click to expand...
Such is life, can't get excited about it. The tories abandoned fiscal responsibility in 2010 when they kicked of a period of unnecessary austerity that has almost wrecked the country. I guess Moody's have just loved that.

We need additional spending on public services to rebuild the collapse we've seen over the last 9 years of tory mismanagement of the country and economy. Organisations such as Moody's are interested only in what is best for them, not for a country and its people. Govt policy should not be based on the mutterings of such organisations, imo.
 
jay said:
Sorry if this has been covered.

Moody's (Credit Ratings Agency) have changed their outlook on the UK's Aa2 rating from stable to negative. Commentary was pretty damning, siting an erosion in institutional strength that's likely to remain for some time to come given the inevitably contentious nature of the negotiations with the EU. They're not very impressed with the abandonment of fiscal responsibility from the main parties and the erratic and significant spending promises given that there's no plan to increase revenues to finance the spending.
Click to expand...
All that borrowing to mitigate the disastrous effects of Brexit just got a lot more expensive.
 
Brian said:
We need additional spending on public services to rebuild the collapse we've seen over the last 9 years of tory mismanagement of the country and economy. Organisations such as Moody's are interested only in what is best for them, not for a country and its people. Govt policy should not be based on the mutterings of such organisations, imo.
Click to expand...

So, you want vast extra spending and Labour are talking about huge amounts of borrowing (as are the Tories, but they won’t ever admit it)... who exactly are they going to borrow from, and at what rates? A ratings drop means interest goes up and the cost to the tax-payer/future tax-payer therefore increases. That downgrade likely equates to £bns in real terms.
 
Nick_G said:
Leave The EU or Remain in the EU. There was nothing more more specific than that, therefore it is impossible to say what sort of Leave people voted for. To claim that all who voted leave voted for No Deal is spurious at best and at worst is insulting to Leavers by the implications of that statement.
Click to expand...
There was nothing specific about remain either, because nobody knows where the EU will end up or the cost.
 
Worrying times ahead if Moody's downgrading of the UK impacts massively on the spending plans of the main parties. Perhaps we should stick with Austerity after all and not burden our grandchildren with insurmountable debt incurred by ourselves and not of benefit to them. That would be immoral in my opinion. Problem being of course trying to convince the vociferous critics of the Tory scum hanging is too good for them posters on PFM. Makes making poverty a thing of the past an easy problem to solve.
 
Remember this is not the first downgrade the Conservative Party have led us to either. The UK was a solid ‘Triple A’ when this bunch of self-serving and entirely destructive clownsticks started in government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top