Is Brexit actually going to happen?

[DexterTCN]

It's top 3 jobs...PM, Chancellor and HS.

When Cameron resigned I, everybody else and the tories no doubt, had little idea which 'cream' if you like, would rise to the top. Typically it seems like the worst options are to the fore.

And telling me about winning a bet would carry more weight if you tell me about 100 other bets you made and what happened

 

[SpackleFrog]

It's top 3 jobs...PM, Chancellor and HS.

When Cameron resigned I, everybody else and the tories no doubt, had little idea which 'cream' if you like, would rise to the top. Typically it seems like the worst options are to the fore.

And telling me about winning a bet would carry more weight if you tell me about 100 other bets you made and what happened

Oh give over May was quiet during ref despite being Remain therefore was the only viable unity candidate wasn't that difficult! But because everyone was insisting that Johnson would be PM the odds on May were ludicrous.

I can tell you that Wolves Hand of God tribute act cost me a lot today, that handball must have ruined a record number of accumulators

 

[Dogsauce]

'There would be our ability to have people inspected' is what he says.
Well there wouldn't be the ability to have people inspected on such a long border without it being a massive job.

It’s alright, with no minimum wage it’ll be fairly cheap to hire G4S/Serco goons to police the border.

 

[xarmian]

The man's a loon, I can imagine the ROI goverment just vetoing any UK-EU deal than includes any such suggestion.

Already vetoed in the Joint Report.

49. The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

50. In the absence of agreed solutions, as set out in the previous paragraph, the United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, unless, consistent with the 1998 Agreement, the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland. In all circumstances, the United Kingdom will continue to ensure the same unfettered access for Northern Ireland's businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market.​

That's already impossible without a very soft UK-wide Brexit. Chequers was inching towards that. Rees-Mogg is raising the temperature talking about people crossing the border. That puts the Common Travel Agreement under threat when it was only goods transit being discussed before. He's trying to use anti-immigrant sentiment to push for a hard border, no withdrawal deal and no transition period.

 

[philosophical]

With no minimum wage it would be fairly cheap to bribe those goons.

 

[Humirax]

Could you not just put him on ignore like other people do?

Ignoring the tragic attention whore makes sense, thankyou for the advice.

 

[Pickman's model]

Ignoring the tragic attention whore makes sense, thankyou for the advice.

Yeh that will help the coherence of your arguments in future

 

[Toast Rider]

So I keep getting videos show up on my YouTubes feed from the 'three brexit blokes' or someone called 'Jason J Hunter'. They give the appearance of being well informed, though anti-brexit.

Are they legit?

 

[DexterTCN]

So I keep getting videos show up on my YouTubes feed from the 'three brexit blokes' or someone called 'Jason J Hunter'. They give the appearance of being well informed, though anti-brexit.

Are they legit?

Yes.

 

[Toast Rider]

Yes.

So Brexit's fucked then

 

[Pickman's model]

So Brexit's fucked then

It's all fucked.

 

[DexterTCN]

So Brexit's fucked then

Well that depends on who you ask!

Their points and concerns seem 'forensic' enough. I know it's not proper use of forensic but I refuse to engage my brain too much on a sunday morning to think of a better word.

 

[SpackleFrog]

So I keep getting videos show up on my YouTubes feed from the 'three brexit blokes' or someone called 'Jason J Hunter'. They give the appearance of being well informed, though anti-brexit.

Are they legit?

They are legit authentic blokes they have pints and pay per click advertising and everything.

 

[kebabking]

So Brexit's fucked then

It depends what you mean by 'fucked' and what you think the intention of Brexit was in the first place...

The 'remain' opposition to Brexit, it seems to me, focuses entirely on economics and trade, somewhat ignoring the fact that both the overwhelming majority of the Brexit vote, and the 20+ years of Tory opposition to EU membership wasn't about economics and trade in the first place.

If you were fundamentally, deeply unhappy in a marriage, would you make your decision about whether to leave or stay based on whether you would be richer or poorer in or out of the marriage, or would you decide on whether to leave or stay based on where you were going to feel happier?

To me, as one who voted remain, it seems that the whole of the remain campaign has completely lost its mind and is - effectively - screaming that an unhappy marriage can't be allowed to end because it would mean smaller houses and less expensive cars and holidays for the parties involved, that happiness can only be derived from material wealth and that identity and what a party in that failing marriage wants out of their life is far less important, indeed irrelevant, compared to the difference between the joint and separate earning power of the couple - however unhappy.

It's lunacy, utterly myopic lunacy.

 

[sealion]

Are they legit?

At what?

 

[Toast Rider]

At what?

Are they credible sources.

 

[Toast Rider]

It depends what you mean by 'fucked' and what you think the intention of Brexit was in the first place...

The 'remain' opposition to Brexit, it seems to me, focuses entirely on economics and trade, somewhat ignoring the fact that both the overwhelming majority of the Brexit vote, and the 20+ years of Tory opposition to EU membership wasn't about economics and trade in the first place.

If you were fundamentally, deeply unhappy in a marriage, would you make your decision about whether to leave or stay based on whether you would be richer or poorer in or out of the marriage, or would you decide on whether to leave or stay based on where you were going to feel happier?

To me, as one who voted remain, it seems that the whole of the remain campaign has completely lost its mind and is - effectively - screaming that an unhappy marriage can't be allowed to end because it would mean smaller houses and less expensive cars and holidays for the parties involved, that happiness can only be derived from material wealth and that identity and what a party in that failing marriage wants out of their life is far less important, indeed irrelevant, compared to the difference between the joint and separate earning power of the couple - however unhappy.

It's lunacy, utterly myopic lunacy.

Not sure that analogy holds given that, if the claims of the likes of the people I mentioned are true, there are significant consequences to leaving such that leaving at this time would simply leave us economically bereft.

 

[sealion]

Are they credible sources.

Depends what side of the fence you're on i suppose. A few pro eu millionaires that have done very well for themselves are not going to bite the hand that feeds them.

 

[brogdale]

It depends what you mean by 'fucked' and what you think the intention of Brexit was in the first place...

The 'remain' opposition to Brexit, it seems to me, focuses entirely on economics and trade, somewhat ignoring the fact that both the overwhelming majority of the Brexit vote, and the 20+ years of Tory opposition to EU membership wasn't about economics and trade in the first place.

If you were fundamentally, deeply unhappy in a marriage, would you make your decision about whether to leave or stay based on whether you would be richer or poorer in or out of the marriage, or would you decide on whether to leave or stay based on where you were going to feel happier?

To me, as one who voted remain, it seems that the whole of the remain campaign has completely lost its mind and is - effectively - screaming that an unhappy marriage can't be allowed to end because it would mean smaller houses and less expensive cars and holidays for the parties involved, that happiness can only be derived from material wealth and that identity and what a party in that failing marriage wants out of their life is far less important, indeed irrelevant, compared to the difference between the joint and separate earning power of the couple - however unhappy.

It's lunacy, utterly myopic lunacy.

Irrespective of the nationalist guff fed to their base/electorate, tory notions of Brexit have only ever been based upon accelerating capital's withdrawal from the supposed post-war consensus and transition from welfare state to consolidator/oligarchic state.

It's all about the base.

 

[kebabking]

Not sure that analogy holds given that, if the claims of the likes of the people I mentioned are true, there are significant consequences to leaving such that leaving at this time would simply leave us economically bereft.

I'm assuming you've never got divorced...

 

[TremulousTetra]

ACAB is a systemic analysis - it's the system that produces these people, it can do nothing but. There can be no substantive fightback by individual coppers because a) that's not what the system is for or produces b) the wider system relies on the sub-system of policing to operate as it does. Therefore, despite any personal niceness - and there are plenty of nice coppers - the system must prevail and they must take up and play their role in it. Therefore ACAB. Until the social functions that state policing have enclosed from wider society are returned by popular collective action and the specialised skills they have developed are democratised then ACAB.

Will that do?

(God what boring crap)

yes most people I come across would be more greatly affected in a democratic way by that argument, than a simple all coppers are bastards, which is a statement you have proven is incorrect. Perhaps all coppers have to be bastards

 

[Toast Rider]

I'm assuming you've never got divorced...

I'd rather people speak plainly, I find metaphors difficult to parse sometimes

 

[Toast Rider]

Depends what side of the fence you're on i suppose. A few pro eu millionaires that have done very well for themselves are not going to bite the hand that feeds them.

I don't see how. Either what they say is true or it isn't. Same with anyone on either side. I've no idea if they are millionaires or how. I'm trying to discern whether what they are saying is correct or not.

 

[pseudonarcissus]

Either what they say is true or it isn't.

That’s very pre-Trumpian logic.

 

[Toast Rider]

That’s very pre-Trumpian logic.

Not sure what that means, but having to explain this over the course of several posts is certainly bizarre.

Again, either their claims are true or false. They are empirical claims, for example if we leave the EU certain other nations, Japan and Canada to name two that they have mentioned explicitly, will have to ask the EU's permission/negotiate with them before doing a deal with us because of stipulations in their treaties with the EU. Now, either that is true or it is false.

 

[pseudonarcissus]

If you were fundamentally, deeply unhappy in a marriage, would you make your decision about whether to leave or stay based on whether you would be richer or poorer in or out of the marriage, or would you decide on whether to leave or stay based on where you were going to feel happier?

I suspect most of our “friends” are going to blame us and side with the ex...particularly is they’ll get to keep the BMW and the house in the sun. It’s going to get very lonely once the UK is out in the world. Of course everyone says they like us both, but we will see who does actually pop a trade deal in with the Christmas card.

 

[kebabking]

I'd rather people speak plainly, I find metaphors difficult to parse sometimes

When I got divorced it cost me a fortune - as part of the process I enriched several solicitors and I bought someone I can't stand the sight of a house, and (perhaps rather obviously) went from living in a two income household to living in a one income household. Not only was I materially poorer at the end of the divorce than I was at the beginning, but it appeared that I was then always going to be poorer than had I stayed married - but I considered that concrete cost, and the opportunity cost in the future, to be money very well spent. I still do - in fact I would consider no longer being married to my first wife such a valuable prize that it would have been fantastic value at 5 times the price.

Leaving the EU isn't about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to be part of something that makes you unhappy.

 

[Toast Rider]

When I got divorced it cost me a fortune - as part of the process I enriched several solicitors and I bought someone I can't stand the sight of a house, and (perhaps rather obviously) went from living in a two income household to living in a one income household. Not only was I materially poorer at the end of the divorce than I was at the beginning, but it appeared that I was then always going to be poorer than had I stayed married - but I considered that concrete cost, and the opportunity cost in the future, to be money very well spent. I still do - in fact I would consider no longer being married to my first wife such a valuable prize that it would have been fantastic value at 5 times the price.

Leaving the EU isn't about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to be part of something that makes you unhappy.

But there are many people involved in this marriage and some of them say they are happy being part of it.

Happiness is one thing, fucking up the economy is something else.

 

[brogdale]

When I got divorced it cost me a fortune - as part of the process I enriched several solicitors and I bought someone I can't stand the sight of a house, and (perhaps rather obviously) went from living in a two income household to living in a one income household. Not only was I materially poorer at the end of the divorce than I was at the beginning, but it appeared that I was then always going to be poorer than had I stayed married - but I considered that concrete cost, and the opportunity cost in the future, to be money very well spent. I still do - in fact I would consider no longer being married to my first wife such a valuable prize that it would have been fantastic value at 5 times the price.

Leaving the EU isn't about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to be part of something that makes you unhappy.

Either staying within the 'loveless marriage' to the neoliberal supra-state or leaving and 'living in sin' with other 'free-trade' oligarchies/kleptocracies, we're not divorcing ourselves from the thing that makes us unhappy.

 

[Toast Rider]

Either staying within the 'loveless marriage' to the neoliberal supra-state or leaving and 'living in sin' with other 'free-trade' oligarchies/kleptocracies, we're not divorcing ourselves from the thing that makes us unhappy.

In fact we'd be moving back home to live with the abusive racist parents