Theresa May in final push for Brexit

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
32,731
26,879
Kansas
#61
Why would you need to be informed if you were living it up under a economic boom produced by an arrangement with the EU?
Because if you're not informed, you'll believe things like leaving the EU will be easy, won't cost very much and will leave us all better off. Clearly, that's not the case now, and if it ever could've been the case, the Leave campaign had no effective plan for getting there.

Beyond that, I don't want to digress the topic: Deciding this matter in a simple up-or-down vote among the body politic was always a bad, bad idea. It should've been a vote to authorize Parliament to make arrangements for exiting, which would then result in another vote to actually stay or leave on that basis, at a minimum. Referenda, as a concept, on complex policy issues are bad.
 
Last edited:

Singularity

Former Staff
Oct 2009
32,731
26,879
Kansas
#62
So it looks like Theresa May's current approach is to try to get the right-wing European Reform Group on side by whatever means necessary. In the main, she is threatening to ask the EU for an article 50 extension for a period of time that will only be possible if the UK participates in the May elections for the European Parliament. The ERG want to prevent this from happening at all costs, out of fear that the elections will be dominated by Remainers and effectively constitute a second referendum to Remain.

So, May will offer them a choice: Accept her deal and leave on the agreed understanding with the EU, or defy her and risk losing everything as they see it. The problem May has is, she has no majority even if all Tories (including the ERG) vote with her. She needs the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland. And they've made it plain that they will not accept the deal under any circumstances.

So we're just going to continue this stupid dance, holding one pointless vote after another, until someone blinks.
 
Nov 2007
1,959
1,143
Prague, Czech Republic
#63
Why would you need to be informed if you were living it up under a economic boom produced by an arrangement with the EU?.

Those are results that can be physically felt by those involved. One does not need to be informed to know they have it good. To follow your previous metaphor - only a stupid person would vote for a new wife if their current wife was giving them great sex and happiness. So I don't find your argument they were just unaware of the complexities convincing in the least. Either they didn't have it as good as you say or they are stupid people. One or the other.
Congratulations, you've demolished the argument that life is perfect for everybody as long as Britain is a member of the EU. But I don't recall anyone ever making it.
 
Nov 2014
31,573
6,062
North Carolina
#64
Congratulations, you've demolished the argument that life is perfect for everybody as long as Britain is a member of the EU. But I don't recall anyone ever making it.
Really? No one was making it?

You might want to go read the initial comment that prompted that entire exchange then - where Britain's membership to the EU was described as a marriage with great sex, hardly any fighting and a fully enriching experience. Sounds pretty perfect to me.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2012
3,251
790
the Sussex Downs
#66
Odds are 60/40 that the UK ends up holding a second referendum that cancels Brexit entirely, at this stage. The people who brought this stuff about had no workable plan to make it happen, they sold the British electorate a mountain of bullshit, and now they're running out of rope. That doesn't mean the UK will be a permanent member of the EU, but it probably isn't happening this year.
A second referendum would be Illegal - unconstitutional.
 
Aug 2012
3,251
790
the Sussex Downs
#67
That's Brexit. It doesn't make any sense. Why they did this now, for the stated reasons they did, in the way they did it, makes absolutely no damn sense.

Don't like the EU? OK, pass legislation saying the EU can't do certain things and negotiate the outcome. Or at least think this stuff out better.

Some guys with a lot of money and the capacity to simultaneously lie their asses off and believe foolish things pushed the country onto the edge of a cliff.

Most of them are now voluntarily out of government, making no particular effort to steer the ship they launched on a perilous course.
Looooooooooooooooooool
 
Nov 2014
31,573
6,062
North Carolina
#68
Because if you're not informed, you'll believe things like leaving the EU will be easy, won't cost very much and will leave us all better off. Clearly, that's not the case now, and if it ever could've been the case, the Leave campaign had no effective plan for getting there.

Beyond that, I don't want to digress the topic: Deciding this matter in a simple up-or-down vote among the body politic was always a bad, bad idea. It should've been a vote to authorize Parliament to make arrangements for exiting, which would then result in another vote to actually stay or leave on that basis, at a minimum. Referenda, as a concept, on complex policy issues are bad.
I just find it had to believe that the British People would have wanted to leave in the first place if it was working out so great for them. That's the sticking point I have with your argument - not necessarily whether or not the departure was handled as effectively as it could have been.

It seems to me your argument has left me with two possibilities: 1. the British People are morons who wanted to leave a union that was benefiting them greatly for no reason or 2. things weren't quite so rosy as part of the EU as you make them out to be.

I tend to believe the latter since Britain doesn't strike me as a stupid country.
 
Aug 2012
3,251
790
the Sussex Downs
#69
I don't need to read any of the he following. I comprehend what a bunch of fucking pussies in Parliament we have. I even e-mailed my local MP to say how fucking useless they all are. The public voted to join a common market with a commission, not a fucking dictatorship with a Parliament. Plus, how the hell does parliament vote on how we leave??? The dickheads didn't vote us in, we had useless prime minister's running off signing treaties.

The UK needed a Thatcher or Trump to sort this shit out but with have a useless old hag fucking it up. And if you think you can preach to me the shit you're coming out with, think again.
We didn't need anyone darling. As soon as the result of the referendum was in the 1972 Act should have been repealed by Parliament - on instruction of the franchise, who constitutionally must be (but were not in 1971) consulted in matters pertaining to relinquishing sovereignty over to a foreign power outside having been conquered in war ( Bill of Rights 1688-9 and so forth) -,and Art 50 should have been triggered.

Parliament and our governance needs reforming now --- Parliament is not fit for purpose and our local govs have been dismantled --- there is so much work to be done but those sadistic, self serving, good for nothings in Parliament ave just wasted two years torturing the whole country 'cos they are either corrupt or cowards or both.

Cowardice in public office = Westminster Parliament
 
Aug 2012
3,251
790
the Sussex Downs
#70
I just find it had to believe that the British People would have wanted to leave in the first place if it was working out so great for them. That's the sticking point I have with your argument - not necessarily whether or not the departure was handled as effectively as it could have been.

It seems to me your argument has left me with two possibilities: 1. the British People are morons who wanted to leave a union that was benefiting them greatly for no reason or 2. things weren't quite so rosy as part of the EU as you make them out to be.

I tend to believe the latter since Britain doesn't strike me as a stupid country.
We are informed by the living of it.
 
Likes: Jeremy

Similar Discussions