On Sunday, 10 July 2016 15:21:19 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2016 14:07:53 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article ,
T i m wrote:

p.s. On the Sunday Politics show this morning I caught a bit where
they had asked someone why they voted leave and the answer was the
classic 'to stop immigration. When asked if he had considered any
other aspects like a potential negative financial impact on the
country and he answered 'I don't care, it's only me and my dog ...'.

If you watched any vox pops from the areas which were once prosperous, it
was the common reason.

And when they explained there were more immigrants coming into this
country (legally) than those coming in from the EU (also legally) they
seemed stunned (it was definitely 'news to them')?

Stunned because it was such an utterly obvious and pointless point, it's hard to know what to say to it.

When it was
explained that these 'immigrants' were often a) doing the jobs that
many English people wouldn't and b) paying their taxes and buying our
products and c) many industries wouldn't be able to cope without them
... they were even further stunned.

same as the above

However, being stunned didn't seem to stop the auto response of
'well, yeah, but we have too many immigrants ...'

*Every* honest discussion I have seen or heard since has had this
undertone of 'no one fully contemplated the consequences of leaving
the EU', because no one could of course.

discussions by people that haven't engaged brain maybe.

Some however had a reasonably good idea and from a general
man-in-the-street and most experts POV, it now looks like leaving
seems to be more negative (especially in the short term (~12 years))
to most people lives than staying.

for 'looks like' read 'that's the spin I'm hearing on it'

The leavers that aren't seriously (now) considering the consequences
of their actions are generally those who voted Leave for some bogus
and most likely never-to-be-seen-ITRW 'outcome'.

more propaganda

Like, home many *more* immigrants might we see over the next two years
as opposed to those who might have been coming in over the next 10 had
we stayed?

How will the leavers cope with not 180,000 p.a. but 750,000? They will
come even knowing there won't be a job or housing because it's their
'last chance'?

more propaganda

And I don't think you could accuse the BBC of being
pro leave so showing a carefully edited viewpoint.

Nope, they generally show an equal number of both sides.

From when I used to listen to the BBC, it's not the number they play with, but how well thought thought each side's points are. And the real key points are often just not mentioned at all.

It might just be him when the cost of dog food goes up. ;-(

Or even his own food.

If it's delivered by a vehicle it will already be costing more (with
fuel bought against the pound - dollar value).

And that's the point isn't it ...

no

most of the great unwashed have so

I think you'll find the masses do wash these days. Bathrooms & DHW are affordable now.

little idea about the 'bigger picture' of all this it frightens me
that they are allowed to vote.

a separate topic for another thread

I didn't vote (well I voted NOTA [1])
because *I know* I don't know enough about it.

Cheers, T i m

[1] And that's another thing that has often been brought up in these
post Brexit discussions. Had the people been able to vote for a few
more options, we might have got closer to what the people *actually*
wanted than the binary *choice* they were given (or were tricked into
making).

So when the vote goes your way, people voted rightly and when it doesnt they were 'tricked.' Oh, and now the outcome doesn't suit you you want some other options instead.


NT