Brexit - Post Match Reaction

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brexit-european-union-britain-eu-referendum-better-off-a7332036.html

'In three to five years from now, my bet would be that England will be better off than continental Europe' says a German Publisher

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brexit-european-union-britain-eu-referendum-better-off-a7332036.html

 

'In three to five years from now, my bet would be that England will be better off than continental Europe' says a German Publisher

Yes Wes, but a German publisher could not possibly be more authoritative than a history graduate or an IBM project manager (of 25 years I'll have you know), therefore your post will be ignored

You know things are desperate when a lone German businessman supporting Brexit is news.

You know things are desperate when a lone German businessman supporting Brexit is news.

I guess it depends on whether you attach more credence to one of Germany's most prominent business leaders - a CEO of a company employing 15,000 people with €3 billion worth of revenues - or go on the musings of an IBM project manager (with an impressive 25 years of managing software projects) or a history graduate who has risen beyond the heights of a comments editor.... hmmm now let me think about that one for a minute.!!!

I guess it depends on whether you attach more credence to one of Germany's most prominent business leaders - a CEO of a company employing 15,000 people with €3 billion worth of revenues - or go on the musings of an IBM project manager (with an impressive 25 years of managing software projects) or a history graduate who has risen beyond the heights of a comments editor.... hmmm now let me think about that one for a minute.!!!

It also depends on what is real and what is positioning yourself to look good in changed circumstances. Axel Springer's two main publications are Bild and Die Welt. Both of whom strongly backed Britain remaining in the EU.

It also depends on what is real and what is positioning yourself to look good in changed circumstances. Axel Springer's two main publications are Bild and Die Welt. Both of whom strongly backed Britain remaining in the EU.

But this chap has climbed to the very top of the career ladder... chief executive of a multi billion pound company that employs 15,000 people...., whilst your bloke has spent 25 years of his life climbing the ladder to reach the giddy heights of a project manager LOL

But this chap has climbed to the very top of the career ladder... chief executive of a multi billion pound company that employs 15,000 people...., whilst your bloke has spent 25 years of his life climbing the ladder to reach the giddy heights of a project manager LOL

:lol: Look, Johnny, Timmy says that we must be desperate citing a lone individual, whereas the opinions of individuals on the Remain side are to be given serious attention.

Timmy points out that Mathias Doepfner's publications expressed the view during the referendum campaign that the UK should remain in the EU. In light of what he says in that article, that position was hardly surprising. He wanted us to stay in as a stabilising influence.

Meanwhile, the remaining EU members would lose Britain's “healthy influence”, in particular its “pragmatism” and “free-market orientation”, which had led to “sensible compromises” in negotiations in the bloc.

 

“If it is all defined, let's say, by France, Spain and Italy making compromises with Germany - I'm a little worried by that prospect,” he told the newspaper.

He recognises that it will be those very attributes that will hold us in good stead in the coming years when we are free from the EU.

But this chap has climbed to the very top of the career ladder... chief executive of a multi billion pound company that employs 15,000 people...., whilst your bloke has spent 25 years of his life climbing the ladder to reach the giddy heights of a project manager LOL

were either of your parents goldfish,or from Portsmouth? You seem to have a lot of trouble remembering which points were made and who said what.

Again for clarity. He is blowing with the wind. Pre-referendum he was advocating remain. It's one person in isolation. Verbal quoted the journo not me.

were either of your parents goldfish,or from Portsmouth? You seem to have a lot of trouble remembering which points were made and who said what.

 

Again for clarity. He is blowing with the wind. Pre-referendum he was advocating remain. It's one person in isolation. Verbal quoted the journo not me.

Your first line leads me to believe that you are losing your marbles.

Show me where I mistook what you said with Verbal's comments.

As for Doepfner's stance, I have already expressed an opinion about that; he was keen on us remaining in the EU as a stabilising influence and now expresses regret that we will not be able to fulfil that role. And I repeat, you were perfectly happy to quote the opinions of one person when they laid out the benefits of remaining in the EU, the so-called experts, and likewise many of them are now also changing their tune.

Your first line leads me to believe that you are losing your marbles.

 

Show me where I mistook what you said with Verbal's comments.

 

As for Doepfner's stance, I have already expressed an opinion about that; he was keen on us remaining in the EU as a stabilising influence and now expresses regret that we will not be able to fulfil that role. And I repeat, you were perfectly happy to quote the opinions of one person when they laid out the benefits of remaining in the EU, the so-called experts, and likewise many of them are now also changing their tune.

Wes! At least you're consistent - you've effed up again. I was replying to Johnny so your assumption I was referring to points you made is a little odd.

Wes! At least you're consistent - you've effed up again. I was replying to Johnny so your assumption I was referring to points you made is a little odd.

were either of your parents goldfish,or from Portsmouth? You seem to have a lot of trouble remembering which points were made and who said what.

Understandable from the way that you phrased it. We had both responded to you and your bizarre response regarding parentage can be read as questioning both his and mine. And it was my link that elicited the response from you that Doepfner's opinion should be discarded because he gave it as an individual, so again it was reasonable to conclude that you were also responding to me too.

There's a pattern here (and elsewhere). Brexiteers are so unbelievably ANGRY, and Remainers (or Rejoiners, as I think they should be called now) spend most of their time laughing at their apoplexy. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

Understandable from the way that you phrased it. We had both responded to you and your bizarre response regarding parentage can be read as questioning both his and mine. And it was my link that elicited the response from you that Doepfner's opinion should be discarded because he gave it as an individual, so again it was reasonable to conclude that you were also responding to me too.

In which case I would have quoted both of you.

There's a pattern here (and elsewhere). Brexiteers are so unbelievably ANGRY, and Remainers (or Rejoiners, as I think they should be called now) spend most of their time laughing at their apoplexy. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

I think you're reading it wrong... I'm not angry... far from it. I'm an optimistic and hopeful Brexiter looking forward to the future. I view the remoaners as negative and pessimistic at heart, wishing that everything will come crashing down, just so that they say I told you so. I would suggest a higher proportion of remoaners on here don't appear to be laughing at all and are in fact 'angry'.

It's even been suggested that my parents were born in Portsmouth. It doesn't get lower than that and shows the desperation of remoaners to get a rise. Ironically, my mum is an Irish immigrant and my dad a northerner, although I was born in Southampton General, so I guess I am a scummer by birth.

There's a pattern here (and elsewhere). Brexiteers are so unbelievably ANGRY, and Remainers (or Rejoiners, as I think they should be called now) spend most of their time laughing at their apoplexy. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

And by angry I mean angry. The Metropolitan Police is just one of a number of forces to report a sudden surge, post-referendum, in Brexiter violence directed in particular at East Europeans.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/28/hate-crime-horrible-spike-brexit-vote-metropolitan-police

Once the court cases have been concluded, we'll also be able to draw some conclusions about the killings of Jo Cox and two Polish nationals in the run-up and aftermath of the vote.

Brexiter rage, turning to physical assault, is clearly something that will have to be tackled.

And by angry I mean angry. The Metropolitan Police is just one of a number of forces to report a sudden surge, post-referendum, in Brexiter violence directed in particular at East Europeans.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/28/hate-crime-horrible-spike-brexit-vote-metropolitan-police

 

Once the court cases have been concluded, we'll also be able to draw some conclusions about the killings of Jo Cox and two Polish nationals in the run-up and aftermath of the vote.

 

Brexiter rage, turning to physical assault, is clearly something that will have to be tackled.

To be honest your tone of voice is one of the angriest on here. A bit pathetic trying to link the actions of a few idiots to the people who voted Brexit - which is the majority of people in your country.

Maybe if you had the intelligence to empathise with your countryfolk and understand why they voted out you wouldn't be quite so angry.

To be honest your tone of voice is one of the angriest on here. A bit pathetic trying to link the actions of a few idiots to the people who voted Brexit - which is the majority of people in your country.

 

Maybe if you had the intelligence to empathise with your countryfolk and understand why they voted out you wouldn't be quite so angry.

Well said.

Not "the majority of people", simply a majority of those who voted. Yet another Brexit myth.

I note Lord Sugar disagrees, with the German tabloid boss.

I note Lord Sugar disagrees, with the German tabloid boss.

That comma makes the statement completely nonsensical.

Does the German tabloid boss also disagree and is therefore with Sugar, or does he disagree with Sugar.

I note Lord Sugar disagrees, with the German tabloid boss.

Do you mean the comment he made that leaving the EU would after five years be as big a disaster as The Great British Bake Off going to Channel 4?

Do you really put that much credence on the opinion of somebody who could trivialise our future in those terms, somebody who doesn't even know that the Arctic is not a natural habitat for penguins?

Sometimes you just can't let a passing straw drift by ungrasped, can you?

That comma makes the statement completely nonsensical.

 

Does the German tabloid boss also disagree and is therefore with Sugar, or does he disagree with Sugar.

Thanks for that you are correct my comma is misused and confusing. I also note that the Head of the German equivalent of the CBI has totally contradicted the Brexit mantra that German Car Manufacturers or indeed German industry in general will be calling the shots over access to the 'Single Market' . So where does he sit in the Brexit rankings of business leaders and the veracity of their views.

Do you mean the comment he made that leaving the EU would after five years be as big a disaster as The Great British Bake Off going to Channel 4?

 

Do you really put that much credence on the opinion of somebody who could trivialise our future in those terms, somebody who doesn't even know that the Arctic is not a natural habitat for penguins?

I thought the current theme was about the views of people who were successful in business, not their expertise on Antarctic Birdlife or their predilection to use flippant comments. Simple questions: Is Sugar a successful business leader? Has he created wealth and jobs in the UK? Has he done despite his left leaning tendencies?

Thanks for that you are correct my comma is misused and confusing. I also note that the Head of the German equivalent of the CBI has totally contradicted the Brexit mantra that German Car Manufacturers or indeed German industry in general will be calling the shots over access to the 'Single Market' . So where does he sit in the Brexit rankings of business leaders and the veracity of their views.

The German chap also said (in relation to hard Brexit) ....

"It's better to have a hard Brexit that works than to have a fudge in the middle that has to be renegotiated or doesn't politically work and you have uncertainty lingering on," Markus Kerber of the German BDI group - the equivalent of the CBI - told the Today programme this morning.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37500140

I thought the current theme was about the views of people who were successful in business, not their expertise on Antarctic Birdlife or their predilection to use flippant comments. Simple questions: Is Sugar a successful business leader? Has he created wealth and jobs in the UK? Has he done despite his left leaning tendencies?

I don't think ad hominem arguments ever progress a discussion. It is all about the hard economic data and as usual, that is just akin to staring in a rear view mirror. There ARE indicators that the EU is mired in a swamp, from a growth, debt, migration control and trade agreement point of view.

What is unarguable is that we are going to be out of the EU and everyone has to like it or lump it. Those patriotic souls amongst us, will do what we can to make a success of the reality we are now in.

"Don't ask what this country can do for you, ask what you can do for this country."

Hopefully the cry babies amongst the Remainers will be able to get out of our way, while we build a new UK.

And if you want to know what will start the euro death spiral, read this.

Is Deutsche Bank the next Lehman Brothers? The denials certainly don't help suggest it's not.

I don't think ad hominem arguments ever progress a discussion. It is all about the hard economic data and as usual, that is just akin to staring in a rear view mirror. There ARE indicators that the EU is mired in a swamp, from a growth, debt, migration control and trade agreement point of view.

 

What is unarguable is that we are going to be out of the EU and everyone has to like it or lump it. Those patriotic souls amongst us, will do what we can to make a success of the reality we are now in.

 

"Don't ask what this country can do for you, ask what you can do for this country."

 

Hopefully the cry babies amongst the Remainers will be able to get out of our way, while we build a new UK.

Excellent post until the last sentence. Its not about cry babies, as a remainer I continue to campaign for what I believe in, would leavers simply have gone away if the result had been the exact opposite? My patriotism will ensure I do for my country whatever is required to make us successful, provided I am not expected to compromise principles in favour of extreme right or left wing policies.

And if you want to know what will start the euro death spiral, read this.

 

 

 

I know this is something of a hobbyhorse for you and they are certainly in a pickle but not exactly the same as Lehman:

“Neil Wilson, a markets analyst at London-based spreadbetter ETX Capital highlighted the bank has been under pressure from aggressive short-selling, notably from some large hedge funds. This includes Soros Fund Management, the family office run by George Soros, which has built up a short position, according to a regulatory filing earlier this year.

"It's not a Lehmans moment in the offing. Banks are generally better capitalized and able to cope with adverse shocks. And Deutsche's derivatives exposure can be overstated," Wilson said in a note Wednesday.

"Deutsche's problem is not capitalization – it's just that its costs have soared (mainly through litigation and fines) and it's not that profitable any more."

The world has changed since the banking crisis and whilst there is still risk, the commentators point about capitalisation is key.

"It's not a Lehmans moment in the offing. Banks are generally better capitalized and able to cope with adverse shocks. And Deutsche's derivatives exposure can be overstated," Wilson said in a note Wednesday.

"Deutsche's problem is not capitalization – it's just that its costs have soared (mainly through litigation and fines) and it's not that profitable any more."

I assume such comentators are more knowledagble in this area than I.

Meanwhile, in the real world, the FTSE forges ahead:

Not "the majority of people", simply a majority of those who voted. Yet another Brexit myth.

Yeah that's how democracy works, how it has always worked, those that give a **** either way vote, those that don't care either way don't bother. Not sure what your point is.

Yeah that's how democracy works, how it has always worked, those that give a **** either way vote, those that don't care either way don't bother. Not sure what your point is.

Read my words. I repeat: the piece I quoted said 'a majority of the people' whereas it was a 'majority of those who voted'. There was quite a difference. 'Only' 17.4 million of the 60 million voted to leave. That is nowhere near a majority.

This is not how democracy works. In normal democracy there is a new vote every few years so in the longer term the people tend to get what they want.

Read my words. I repeat: the piece I quoted said 'a majority of the people' whereas it was a 'majority of those who voted'. There was quite a difference. 'Only' 17.4 million of the 60 million voted to leave. That is nowhere near a majority.

 

This is not how democracy works. In normal democracy there is a new vote every few years so in the longer term the people tend to get what they want.

15 million of the population are under the age of 18.

There is no way of telling the voting intentions of those who didn't vote.

So the majority of those who were old enough to vote and wanted to express an opinion, did. That is how democracy works.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

15 million of the population are under the age of 18.

 

There is no way of telling the voting intentions of those who didn't vote.

 

So the majority of those who were old enough to vote and wanted to express an opinion, did. That is how democracy works.

 

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Totally disagree, especially regarding those who were under 18. In normal democracy the time would soon come when they would be able to express their preference.

I repeat ad infinitum; this was not normal democracy, in fact the complete antithesis of it. If it were we'd have another vote within five years. Then another. Then another...

Totally disagree, especially regarding those who were under 18. In normal democracy the time would soon come when they would be able to express their preference.

 

I repeat ad infinitum; this was not normal democracy, in fact the complete antithesis of it. If it were we'd have another vote within five years. Then another. Then another...

Total eligible voters = 44 million

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/elections/electoralregistration

Don't know how you could disagree unless you are proposing that babies, toddlers and children should have the vote???

Referenda are held up as objective democracy but the answer you get depends on the question you ask and when you ask it. If people had been asked do you:

1. Want to leave the EU entirely

2. Leave the EU but remain in the single market

3. Stay in the EU

Then you would have got a different result, certainly the vote for 1 would be well less than 50%. If the question had been do you want to 'Stay in the EU' or 'Quit the EU' you would have got a different result too because 'stay' is more powerful than 'remain' and 'quit' is more negative and implies failure more than 'leave'. I'm not saying the result was unfair - but it is much more subjective than it appears at first sight.

Total eligible voters = 44 million

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/elections/electoralregistration

 

Don't know how you could disagree unless you are proposing that babies, toddlers and children should have the vote???

How about 16 year olds, they did in the Scottish referendum. Why not 14 year olds? They could easily be 18 by the time we actually leave the EU. I have a granddaughter who turned 18 days after the vote, when will she have the opportunity to have her say on the matter? If it had been a general election she could have her vote in a few years time. How many oldies will have died before the exit? Should anybody over 65 have had a vote? These are all reasonable questions. Our democratic system deemed that we should have an advisory referendum and it is for that system to take account of all these considerations.

But I return to my original point. It was by no means a majority of the people in the country.

(Incidentally my grandmother was 42 before she was allowed to vote)

Poll out today that absolutely sums it up. The only social class whereb the majority voted for Remain was AB . Of people earning over 60k a year 65% of them voted Remain . "I'm all right Jack " rather than "Stronger in " should have been their campaign slogan . Scotland , London & rich people made up the vast majority of Remains support .

How about 16 year olds, they did in the Scottish referendum. Why not 14 year olds? They could easily be 18 by the time we actually leave the EU. I have a granddaughter who turned 18 days after the vote, when will she have the opportunity to have her say on the matter? If it had been a general election she could have her vote in a few years time. How many oldies will have died before the exit? Should anybody over 65 have had a vote? These are all reasonable questions. Our democratic system deemed that we should have an advisory referendum and it is for that system to take account of all these considerations.

 

But I return to my original point. It was by no means a majority of the people in the country.

 

(Incidentally my grandmother was 42 before she was allowed to vote)

if you are suggesting 14, why not 13.....then if you are suggesting 13, may as go down to 12 years old?

Totally disagree, especially regarding those who were under 18. In normal democracy the time would soon come when they would be able to express their preference.

 

I repeat ad infinitum; this was not normal democracy, in fact the complete antithesis of it. If it were we'd have another vote within five years. Then another. Then another...

Whilst we are discussing what is democratic and what isn't, according to your stance there should have been a referendum before we signed the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon. The UK electorate certainly never voted for what those treaties imposed on us. I'm sure that you would have been happy to have referenda on them, wouldn't you?

Whilst we are discussing what is democratic and what isn't, according to your stance there should have been a referendum before we signed the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon. The UK electorate certainly never voted for what those treaties imposed on us. I'm sure that you would have been happy to have referenda on them, wouldn't you?

Absolutely spot on. You can't moan about the referendum not being democratic when the biggest change to our standing in the world got done by the back door.

Whilst we are on the subject of democracy, you can hardly hold the EU up as a shining example either. The French and Dutch rejected what was, in essence, the Lisbon Constitution. So the EU changed a couple of paragraphs and changed the name to the Lisbon Treaty and the French and Dutch were signed up without consultation.

Our demorcracy might not be perfect, but it's a damn site better than the shambles otherwise known as the EU.

Poll out today that absolutely sums it up. The only social class whereb the majority voted for Remain was AB . Of people earning over 60k a year 65% of them voted Remain . "I'm all right Jack " rather than "Stronger in " should have been their campaign slogan . Scotland , London & rich people made up the vast majority of Remains support .

Damn right, and when we repeal all the human rights legislation I'm going to exploit the plebs to **** in my sweatshop. Bring it on

Poll out today that absolutely sums it up. The only social class whereb the majority voted for Remain was AB . Of people earning over 60k a year 65% of them voted Remain . "I'm all right Jack " rather than "Stronger in " should have been their campaign slogan . Scotland , London & rich people made up the vast majority of Remains support .

I saw that as well:

Britain’s ruling classes were the only group who voted overwhelmingly to stay in the European Union, a new report has found. The report from the Centre for Social Justice and Legatum Institute found that people in the “AB” class – the middle and upper classes - were the only group which had a majority voting to Remain at the June 23 referendum. The majority of people in all the other income groups - described as C1, C2, D and E - all voted to leave, the report said. While 57 per cent of voters in the more affluent AB group voted to remain, the proportion in the other four groups was 36 per cent.

 

It said: "At every level of earning there is a direct correlation between household income and your likelihood to vote for leaving the EU — 62 per cent of those with income of less than £20,000 voted to leave, but that percentage falls in steady increments until, by an income of £60,000, that percentage was just 35 per cent." The 50-page report said that Britain’s decision to leave the EU offers a “once in a in a lifetime chance” to reshape the UK “so that it genuinely helps those who feel they have little stake in society”.

Centre for Social Justice press release..

http://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/UserStorage/pdf/Press%20Releases%202016/CSJ-48_52_pressrelease.pdf

Damn right, and when we repeal all the human rights legislation I'm going to exploit the plebs to **** in my sweatshop. Bring it on

Those plebs see that as a better alternative to what they have at the moment. Might want to ask them why and you may understand why they voted leave.

if you are suggesting 14, why not 13.....then if you are suggesting 13, may as go down to 12 years old?

Their future should have been considered too. Perhaps their guardians should have had an extra vote for each child? I'm just saying that this referendum was not democratic. But it has been and gone now. My complaint was that it certainly wasn't a majority of the people in Britain.

Whilst we are discussing what is democratic and what isn't, according to your stance there should have been a referendum before we signed the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon. The UK electorate certainly never voted for what those treaties imposed on us. I'm sure that you would have been happy to have referenda on them, wouldn't you?

Au contraire. There shouldn't have been any referendums because that is not our democratic way. Parliament is supreme and reflects and implements the will of the people. We didn't have a referendum when we declared war in 1939.

Centre for Social Justice press release..

http://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/UserStorage/pdf/Press%20Releases%202016/CSJ-48_52_pressrelease.pdf

This report says that a reduction in immigration will ease pressure on public services.

Yet where the government could have reduced the numbers ie non-EU immigrants, it's done absolutely nothing. The net figure has been around the 200k mark since the late nineties.

And who's been in charge of immigration for the last six years?. Theresa May, and she's achieved sod all. Now that she's finally woken up, she's targeting students coming to UK universities. These pay higher fees and are helping to subsidise UK students so you may wonder where the logic is in that. But when did logic ever have a place in politics?

Au contraire. There shouldn't have been any referendums because that is not our democratic way. Parliament is supreme and reflects and implements the will of the people. We didn't have a referendum when we declared war in 1939.

Except this government was elected on the promise of a refurendum.

This report says that a reduction in immigration will ease pressure on public services.

 

Yet where the government could have reduced the numbers ie non-EU immigrants, it's done absolutely nothing. The net figure has been around the 200k mark since the late nineties.

 

And who's been in charge of immigration for the last six years?. Theresa May, and she's achieved sod all. Now that she's finally woken up, she's targeting students coming to UK universities. These pay higher fees and are helping to subsidise UK students so you may wonder where the logic is in that. But when did logic ever have a place in politics?

If we apply the same restriction on EU immigrants as we do non EU then 75% wouldn't get in.