On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 22:54:47 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 11/02/2018 12:47, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 12:04:53 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

I have asked and none of them have come up with any facts, only
fantasy and BS. Wanna give it a go?

That depends on if you're asking real questions or point scoring.

Given I don't have a dog in this fight, I have only / ever been
interested in the facts mate. In fact, it's the whole crux of my main
discussion. However, I don't count someone's 'hunches' or opinion,
hopes and desires as facts. So, if that doesn't completely tie your
hands, I would really like an answer please (even if it's only one
particular Brexiteers version of it).

For someone who claims not to have a dog in this fight, you make it look
so..

Of course, to you. Anyone with an open mind and able to see things
objectively would see it for what it is.


snip

And you think that's what your fellow fanatical Brexiteers 'voted for'
do you? Or maybe you all voted for something different so it will be
interesting to see how well they manage to placate that range.

I wouldn't have called myself fanatical, 99.9% of Brexiters.

But I'm not sure you would be in a position to judge that.

Maybe not. I have my reasons for supporting Brexit and have given them
here numerous times.

Ok.

I'm no so fanatical I have joined in or paid any
subscription to further Brexit.

I'm afraid that isn't the only sign of a fanatical Brexiteer. Other
examples would be the complete dismissal of anyone who doesn't think
your way, so 2/3rds of the electorate in this case.

Or the complete inability to present any facts that support your
'hunch' that the UK *will* be better off outside the EU.

Or you ability to answer the question of 'what things you think you
voted for in the referendum do you believe to come to pass and of
those things that do, what percentage strength will they be?

Look, I realise you don't *actually* have any answers to those
questions, but it would be interesting to even see how your 'hunches'
work out in time.

Unlike many
here I have never started a topic on Brexit.

Fair enough. However (devils advocate) that may just mean you are more
respectful of the group than not a fanatical Brexiteer.

Perhaps, it is also a time thing.

Ok.

Perhaps it's more a loser Remoaner thing.

'Remoaner', another classic Brexiteer comment. If I called you a
Brexsh1teer than your use of 'Remoaner' might be considered
reasonable.

Fair enough, but I see no need for Brexiters to be called thick or any
other negative quantity.

Maybe not ... however, if someone keep stating their hunches as if
they are fact, what is any outside supposed to make of that?

Many remainers come out as poor losers.

I'm sure they do (to you) and I'm sure many are. However, maybe many
of them also just want what's best for the UK and don't see any sign
of it in anything anyone is saying? And trust me, we are desperately
looking for some as it's going to affect is all. ;-(

Many
remainers have embraced the will of the British people and moved on.

Why is it you seem totally unable (left brainer?), or unwilling
(stubborn Brexiteer) to see that *ONLY* 1/3rd of the electorate voting
*FOR CHANGE* is not, the 'will of the people'?

Yes, I know that in your world, 52% voted leave and only 48% voted
remain so 'leave won' but do you not remember that even Farage stated
that he wouldn't count it a remain win if they didn't get 2/3rds of
the votes? Are you happy for such suggestions to be raised but not
applied fairly to both sides (and that's just the start of the long
list).

My
reference to Remoaners are to those who haven't moved forward and would
with to thwart Brexit against the will of the electorate.

See above. Try to consider that the people who voted Leave and many
of those who couldn't vote at all simply weren't / aren't convinced
that the whole thing was sufficiently well planned, well thought out
to risk doing it under those circumstances?

*Maybe* once the final deal is worked out, you would get your 2/3rds
to Leave or if the deal looks bad enough, you would get 2/3rds to
remain. And if that's what 'the people' think, *that* would be real
democracy in action.

What we have at the moment looks to many reasonable people like you
(Brexiteers) have found a fiver that just dropped out of an old lady's
handbag and you have stuck it in your pocket and are hoping no one has
noticed.

If you were so sure that leaving is the right thing to do *and* still
the will of the people, what have you got to fear by asking the
electorate again, now they have more facts to base their decision on?

I note you snipped that for every 100 remain votes there were 108 Brexit
votes.

Irrelevant mate, see above (and this applies either way round).

And what do you think the 'limited movement of labour' is going to do?
It's foxes and rabbits out there mate, if there are no jobs then there
won't be people 'migrating (not immigrating note) to fill them.

Then the laws of supply and demand take over.

Yes, I just said that ...

And therefore we can expect an increase in wages.

Yes, so you keep saying (but not proving / justifying) and the full
justification would take several pages and with respect, *way* outside
your comprehension. You have a 'hunch' that you understand enough to
make an educated decision. I know you don't ... because no one does
yet.

Its a Remoaner thing to
conveniently deny this.

They don't and I just suggested it.

They most certainly do even if you don't.

Ok.

I am talking of Remoaners
here, as described above.

And hopefully I've outlined their reticence and resistance to what
they see as no more than 'hunches' (that at least you were honest to
admit) and unlike you, don't want to gamble their houses on such vague
/ low odds.

Brilliant planning ... not!

I would say it was a lack of planning from politicians,

Well duh, nothing to do with the EU then?

Not really. The UK could have stopped the expansion of the EU with
developing Eastern European countries and agreeing to immediate free
movement of labour.

Quite. Something we certainly can't influence when *outside* the EU.

I can assure you it is easier to influence immigration into the UK when
outside the EU.

Maybe, but immigration is not *the* issue, it's an issue to some and
it's a solution to / for many.

to **** off the
country and make false promises of house building and immigration.

So it's conspiracy theories now ... or can you offer any proof for
that?

What is the purpose of David Cameron promising to keep immigration to
30,000 or so and in reality 300,000 per year come here to work.

Pass. I'm not gullible enough to believe *any* of their promises (and
why I couldn't vote in the EU referendum).

Precisely, and as a result he got a blooded nose.

Like I said, I'm not into politics, only the politics of democracy and
seeing 'real' democracy in action. Come up with some fully reasoned
and unequivocal *facts* to support your 'hunch' that we will all be
better off outside the EU and I'll give you my full support.

What
did David Cameron say about desired immigration levels?

No idea, I don't listen to any of their BS and empty promises.

Perhaps you should and be enlightened.

By listening to BS?

You are now showing your Remoan credentials, where any reason for
supporting Brexit has to be BS.

No, your vague and pointless comments were BS. You have already stated
that Cameron 'got a bloody nose' so whatever he was trying to do was
obviously not appreciated eh?

Like I said, come up with *real* reasons and justifications that are
based on facts not hunches and if I consider them good and valid (in
the bigger picture) then you will have my full support. Feck, if you
can get me on the Leavers side then you can probably get enough of the
electorate onside also to *actually* make leaving the 'will of the
people. Why wouldn't it?

snip

It was a question mate. Try to keep up. Fancy actually answering it
this time though?

As you have said before any reason I give will be regarded by you as BS.

Nice weasel words. ;-(

Cummon, you must be pretty sure, you must have looked into it all and
therefore you must have a whole load of facts you could give us to
support your beliefs?

DC asked for very few things. The most crucial was immigration:
https://www.ft.com/content/3901dd48-...c-36b487ebd80a

Subscription only? ;-(

But you shouldn't need to quote anyone else, you are the one who is
sure leaving to be the right thing and so you personally must have a
bunch of *facts* to support your feelings, shirley? I mean, you come
across as a reasonable and inelegant person, it really can't be that
difficult can it ... assuming you do actually have some facts that is?

snip

Get used to your version of democracy and ignoring the actual 'will of
the people' you mean?

My version is simple I note you snipped my post that highlighted for
every 100 remain votes there were 108 Brexit votes.

Because it's just you repeating that paragraph from the Brexiteers
equivalent of 'The Watchtower', it doesn't actually change the *fact*
that only 1/3rd of the electorate voted *for change*. It isn't up to
the incumbent to for to keep it the same (I know that's how they made
it on the day, I'm saying that is was bogus).

You go home and say to your family ... Hands up who wants to go on
holiday to Spain this year ... and only 1 of the three of you put your
hands up, do you all then go on holiday to Spain?

I know if it were you posing the question you would, if it were me
there would be a discussion about alternatives that at least 2/3rd of
us might agree on.

You seem to misunderstand democracy, it seems a loser Remoaner thing.

See above.

If 108 say Spain, and 100 say no to Spain,

It's Spain or nothing, why do you need to count those who don't vote
yes?

then the ones who don't
express their preference had their chance either way.

Quite, but ignoring their feelings and opinions isn't 'democracy' is
it? Especially when they represent the majority?

One assumes by the
very nature of democracy they simple didn't care.

Yes and we know what assumption makes of us?

Either way their
numbers simply don't count.

Yes, I know, in your very warped use of the word 'democracy'. FFS, the
referendum was never supposed to be used for such things or held to be
binding ... they just twisted it to be like that.

I assume you haven't worked for a while

I'm not sure what that's got to do with us leaving the EU?

A great deal, it means you don't understand the consequence of
immigration of wages.

Really? You think that just because I've stopped working I no longer
understand anything about working? That I don't have children, friends
or family that are working. Every time you come out with anything like
this as an attempt to diminish someone else's opinion or understanding
of something you further demonstrate you may well be a left brainer
and so not to be trusted with any decisions involving human beings
that are complex. And that's not an insult / slur, it's an
observation.

Perhaps you do understand but in denial of the consequence of
immigration of wages, or rather it wasn't so.

Then state some facts that prove your suggestion. Prove it's not just
another of your 'hunches'?

and have a house that has accumulated in value from housing demand.

Irrelevant.

Its very relevant. Its another reason why people voted Brexit.

Cite?

Do you deny the current housing shortage hasn't had an effect on the
Brexit vote?

No, of course not, but so did the '£350M/week could go to the NHS
instead' and we know that to be irrelevant as well. Ok, what if all
the immigrants and migrants (working here temporarily) went home ...
and we have a nice house for everyone ... who is going to be manning
the hospitals, the shops, the transport system? Where do you think we
can get those people from and do you expect them all to commute back
to their own countries every night?

So, we are back in the situation where there are simply not enough
houses being built to support the population required to sustain us
all, especially as we are all living longer.

Why are
you in denial why so many voted for Brexit.

I am fully aware of the reasons why people voted either way but most
of them can be proven to be bogus. I don't know (personally) of a
single person who voted for Brexit because of house prices.

Perhaps its so obvious. You now know of one. If you had actually asked
the question, "did the increase in housing demand and house prices
affect your vote", you might have got the odd 'yes'.

I'm sure I would ... but most people I know have little interest in
the who farce. They had little interest in it at the time and have
little interest in it now. What's the point till any of us know what
the final deal will be and then they could be an uprising if it looks
like we *will* all be much worse off and for a long time.


You are doing very nicely,

By living in the house I bought 40 years ago?

Precisely. Many will never be able to own a house for so long.

That was already happening when I bought mine.

When was
the last time you knew a NQT purchase their house in the first year
after qualifying?

Pass. But for you to attribute that to the EU and it not just down to
a lack on investment in housing by the government and private
developers will require you to make a very good case. Very few but
those on a bandwagon are going to simply accept your hunch. ;-(

and those trying to get on the housing ladder aren't.

And that has been the same long before any supposed impact because of
the EU. Please try to stick to facts.

The facts are simple, just look at house-price earnings ratios of the
past few decades.

See above.

When was the last time you knew a NQT purchase their house in the first
year after qualifying?

See above.

Houses have always accumulated in value and I can't ever
remember a time when there were loads standing empty anywhere ... till
now of course.

They have accumulated in value in relation to wages. The past 10 years
has seen unprecedented house-price wage ratio.

See above. If you can sell every house you build, why aren't all the
developers jumping on the bandwagon?

Governments and local authorities make builder jump through hoops, plus
there are substantial local taxes to pay for infrastructure.

So what has that got to do with the EU?

snip

I also have no problems with escalating rates for empty houses.

So why didn't we try that first before throwing the baby out with the
bath water?

Because no party showed the will to sort out the housing problem.

Then we needed to create a new party and vote them in?

said earlier we should never believe politicians, hence Brexit.

Quite. Some of us have never believed them. ;-)

But hey, many of the migrant workers who have come here to work , pay
taxes and for our pensions may well choose to migrate home again and
leave the older immigrants and their families who have come here
though our existing immigration and customs controls and may not be so
keen / able to work to take over? Or not.

And create the need for in-work benefits and top up Housing Benefits.

Quite. Immigration we have and have had *full control* over since the
beginning?

Certainly more control. When was the last time the UK population swelled
by over 3 million in 10 years?

When was the last time we were bombing the sh1t out of other countries
and making their population homeless?

The last thing we in the UK / EU need right now is any instability,
given the whole world is upside down.

And we weren't actually doing that bad ... 4th highest GDP, pretty low
unemployment, reasonable standard of living for those in work and no
starvation for those who weren't. Whilst it may not have been perfect,
I can't see it getting worse helping anyone with anything.

Cheers, T i m