On 22/09/2019 00:47, T i m wrote:
On 21 Sep 2019 15:06:30 +0000, Spike wrote:
On 21/09/2019 10:39, T i m wrote:
On 21 Sep 2019 09:58:38 +0000, Spike wrote:
On 18/09/2019 09:36, T i m wrote:

We weren't ready because the majority (the 2/3rds that didn't vote to
Leave) didn't have a reason to.

What a silly argument.

Only if you aren't looking at it from the bigger picture.

And that's a silly argument as well.

In your opinion of course ... and you are?

Perhaps you'd care to describe this 'bigger picture' that you have
suddenly introduced to deflect attention from your previous silly argument.

By the same token 2/3rds didn't vote for Remain.

But remaining is what we were doing already so many wouldn't see the
point of voting for what they already had?

'Hands up who wants an ice cream' is what the actual question should
have been as only those who *want* such would then respond.

So you're saying that the question in the second referendum should have
been 'Who wants to Remain?'

What second referendum?

The one that followed the first referendum.

That's even sillier than your previous argument.

Only because you don't understand the position. But that's fine.

You haven't explained any such thing as a 'position', so there is
nothing to 'understand'

What such a question doesn't cover is those who might prefer an ice
lolly or just a cold drink.

Part of managing democracy is asking the right questions to the right
people and ensuring enough of them agree to any *change* that doesn't
have a very reasonable predicted outcome for 'most people'.

Is it?

Of course.

Christ on a bike. Who are 'the right people'?

MP's have a duty of care to ensure we don't hurt ourselves, like if
50%+1 want crocodiles in all local swimming pools.

MPs have a duty to implement the voters choice, not some made-up fantasy
of yours.

Nope, BS. Shame you actually believe yourself.

What a strange world-view you have - we can vote, but only if we are
'the right people' who have been asked 'the right questions' and
therefore 'ensuring' any change beforehand. That sounds remarkably like
the Soviet system.

We were going along a road that whilst may have had a few bends, was
generally straight and we all had a reasonable idea about what
tomorrow would be like.

Then, a tiny minority of people made the statement that if we turned
of that road, 90 degrees, we would all have better lives, without
anyone actually knowing if that was true or even likely. In fact, some
scouts that looked suggested that it might be a touch of the grass
being greener and could actually just be weed on a stagnant ford.

So, how many rules, regulations, directives, and other imperatives have
been imposed on the UK by the EU since the second referendum vote?

Pass ... but none that have affected 'most people' enough to even have
them on their radar and certainly not enough to lose loads of money
over.

You don't know what has been imposed on you, but can say that 'none' has
affected anyone and no-one has lost shedloads of money?

Laughable. The current emissions/global warming.climate change agenda
has been foisted on us at least in part by the EU, That's affecting
everyone negatively and costing them loads of cash. Have you been asleep
these past few years?

Did *you* see them all coming?

I'm not the one predicting the future, it's the Brexiteers.

No, quite the opposite. You're avoiding the future by sticking your head
in a bucket.

Do you always put forward such silly arguments?

Why are you so selfish?

Why are you so dim? Aren't you one of 'the right people'?

Cheers, T i m



--
Spike