Discussion > First steps towards a sucessful Brexit
Martin AEM. Don't worry about it. Irish people are not going to be expelled from the UK, I promise you.
Just as British people are not going to be expelled from France.You have no evidence to support either assertion, just your usual naive optimism.
Jul 8, 2016 at 12:13 AM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
Entropic Man, you are are the most base form of idiot or, more likely, liar, if you even suggest Irish people are going to be excluded from England. Shame on you. Piece of fucking shit.
michael hart
How dare you, you nasty man.
michael hart
Alan Kendall 7:54 since Brexit, has the Government expressed an opinion about CO2 insanity?
The Climate Change Commission (or whatever it is called) has dropped its blanket opposition to Fracking, but I presume this finding was set in motion before Brexit. This does not have any immediate effect.
Banks are less likely to lend money to Green iniatives, if EU funds are unavailable. This may already have caused a lack of confidence, no doubt enhanced by the doom mongers.
When we have a new female Prime Minister, a new Cabinet will need to be appointed. I am optimistic, but have no evidence.
Having a 'gut instinct' or 'hunch' about something, is what we all do. It is how fortunes are made, and lost. In science, a hunch becomes a hypotheses that is tested. Politics is not a science, but politicians want to be elected next time, and to be proved right about changes that they have instigated due to a hunch/evidence.
Climate science has been based on a hunch that has never passed the evidence test. My hunch is that a new Prime Minister will want to make some quick wins, to bring some optimism into the economy. Cuts in Green Blob funding and income, will form part of that, by removing some of the "Carbon Taxes" that can be blamed on the EU. The Climate Change Act may face neutering by a thousand flicks of a pen.This will also create some additional problems for the Labour leadership, and may provoke further 'red on red' casualties.
But this is all speculation, as nobody knows, and there is no evidence. But our new Prime Minister will be chosen by Conservative MPs putting their re-election and self preservation first. That is why they got rid of Thatcher. That is why Labour MPs don't want Corbyn. For that, there is evidence!
golf charlie
"You have no evidence to support either assertion, just your usual naive optimism.
“It’s a crucial split within the Leave group,” said Gerry Stoker, professor of political science at Southampton University. “It was absolutely clear that a lot of their supporters weren’t just voting for ending new immigration, but for sending back existing immigrants.”
Jul 8, 2016 at 12:13 AM | Entropic man"
EM, when did you find out about evidence? Does Gerry Stoker have any? Do you think his links to the Council of Europe might have compromised his independence as an expert?
golf charlie
Just as British people are not going to be expelled from France.
You have no evidence to support either assertion, just your usual naive optimism.
Jul 8, 2016 at 12:13 AM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
EM - It is not naive optimism to observe how things work in reality. This is not Uganda in 1972.
It's nothing more than your nightmare fantasies that are terrifying you.
The French have always had a good understanding of what side of their tartine the butter is. Quite apart from the fact that the French actually seem to like the English, it would be an economic catastrophe for France if its English residents (or even just those having secondary homes in France) were to leave.
1. It would instantly disappear an incoming cash flow of at least 5,000,000,000€ a year from the French economy.
2. Property values in many rural areas would fall overnight to approximately zero.
Martin A
Michael hart, martinA, rhoda
I've really struck a nerve here. A lot of people, and I mean millions, interpreted the Brexit message exactly as I described.
"Send all these foreigners home"
The Brexiteers allowed them to think so and got their votes thereby. This subterfuge was enough to get the 500,000 vote majority which swung it their way. Now the voters they conned are finding that they are getting just as much competition as before and Brexit is already making them poorer.
I can give you an example. I know a self-employed plumber, working mostly on new housing estates and large public or commercial buildings. He voted Leave because he was led to believe that his foreign competition would be sent home, leaving fewer plumbers in the same size market. He said as much to me before the vote.
Now he finds that his foregn competition is staying, but all the upcoming projects he was contracted for have been postponed or abandoned. When his current projects finish in three months time he will be unemployed. Not what he voted for!
Entropic man
EM - your plumber acquaintance voted on the question
Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
--- Remain a member of the European Union [__]
---- Leave the European Union [__]
Not on "Should all foreigners (above all plumbers in NI) be sent packing? Yes [__ ] No [__ ]"
He voted Leave because he was led to believe that his foreign competition would be sent home, leaving fewer plumbers in the same size market. He said as much to me before the vote.
When he said that to you before the vote, I hope you pointed out to him that that was total wishful thinking on his behalf with no possibility whatever of becoming reality and that he should also consider possible downsides to a 'leave' vote. Did you do that? What was his response?
...Now he finds that his foreign competition is staying, but all the upcoming projects he was contracted for have been postponed or abandoned.
It sounds like he's bullshitting you. Very hard to believe he was "contracted" for anything three months from now. Ask him for the details of what he was signed up that has now been cancelled. Ask him which new housing estate or large public or commercial buildings develpments that he was signed up to work on three months from now, presumably not far from completion, have been abandoned in the last two weeks?
EM, does your plumber acquaintance really exist?
It has to be said that you do have a track record of imagining things and then presenting what you have imagined as reality, even where it does not pass basic plausibility testing.
Martin A
A quick question. Did Irish people resident in the UK get to vote in the referendum?
Martin A
If only Charles de Gaulle had vetoed the British admission to the common market for a third time I wouldn't have been conned into voting 40 years ago to join the free trade area and I wouldn't now be pissed off living under the European Government that it has become.
Martyn
EM, your link to the Guardian story includes no actual promise. What there is is an option, which Gisela Stuart, a German-born Labour back-bencher would do if it was up to her. She has no such power deriving from being a leaver because she is not in power or anywhere near it. Maybe some years down the road we will have more money to spend once we leave, if we leave. Our contributions will surely by then be near or in excess of the poorly-represented gross figure used in the campaign. But nobody can spend it on the NHS or anything else until then.
(And please don't make me read the Guardian again)
rhoda
Martin A
And you imagine that I imagine things.
Jeremy exists and is royally pissed off. He certainly thinks that he was promised prosperity and a migrant free workplace environment.
He is a straightforward man, not usually political, and took the weasel words of the Brexiteers at face value.
Entropic man
EM, I note that when I asked you to quote a promise about sending back immigrants you gave me a link about money for the NHS. The quote you provided was from a remainer charcterising what he said people thought Leave had promised.
One, there seems to be no such promise from Leave, or even a suggestion of sending immigrants home.
Two, Leave cannot make promises of any kind which require them to have power to deliver unless the people give them that power. Which means government. How could it be otherwise?
Three, if your argument comes down to 'some daft people think they heard a promise which was never made and voted on the basis that it was true', I'd have to say 'so what?' An awful lot of daft people voted on both sides and we were very ill-served, as usual, by the media who should have a role to inform but took sides (perfectly ok) and didn't bother about truth (not ok).
There was only one question on the ballot.
rhoda
MartinA
Who could vote in the EU referendum?
British, Irish and Commonwealth citizens who live in the UK, along with Britons who have lived abroad for less than 15 years, were eligible to vote.
Rhoda
You should read the Guardian, as well as whatever you normally read. You get a better view of the world if you read both sides of the question instead of just reading a paper which echoes your right wing beliefs.
Entropic man
Remember this?
Mark Reckless of UKIP planning to send foreign plumbers home.
Entropic man
Rhoda
An awful lot of daft people voted on both sides </blockquoteI regard it as arrogant and insulting of you to label an honest working man as daft.
Entropic man
Martin A
And you imagine that I imagine things.
EM - people are generally consistent. Since now and then you have told me things about myself that are indisputably products of your imagination, it is not unreasable that other things are also the product of your imagination, particularly when they fail the plausibility test or obvious confirmatory details are missing.
Jeremy exists and is royally pissed off. He certainly thinks that he was promised prosperity and a migrant free workplace environment.
EM - you did not answer my obvious question that I posed. When "Jeremy" told you, before the vote, that he had been promised a migrant-free workplace environment, did you point out to him that that was total wishful thinking on his behalf with no possibility whatever of becoming reality and that he should also consider possible downsides to a 'leave' vote. What was his reaction? "EM, I heard it on the radio, so it must be true"?
If you did not put him right, you are responsible for his disappointment, having been aware of his gullibility. If he had been promised an evening with an amorous housewife after each day of plumbing, provided the vote was "leave", would have believed that too?
He is a straightforward man, not usually political, and took the weasel words of the Brexiteers at face value.
Then he is a complete fool and you evidently egged him on in his foolishness.
As I asked before, what did he say when you asked him which new housing estate or large public or commercial buildings developments that he was signed up to work on three months from now, presumably not far from completion, had been abandoned in the last two weeks? Embellishments of the story like that stretch credibility.
Martin A
Remember this?
Mark Reckless of UKIP planning to send foreign plumbers home.
Jul 8, 2016 at 2:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
Gosh, EM you just cannot stop imagining stuff an presenting it as reality, can you? Each time I come in for another swig it seems there is another of your works of imagination.
Mark Reckless of UKIP planning to send foreign plumbers home.
According to the report, about two years ago, long before the referendum was mooted, the guy was asked a hypothetical question about whether a Polish plumber working here and paying taxes should be sent home.
The UKIP guy himself said nothing about plumbers specifically. He gave an off the cuff answer "We should probably allow people who are currently here to have a work permit...."
How your imagination translates that into his planning to send foreign plumbers home is a mystery.
Did *you* advise "Jeremy" that the UKIP had promised to send foreign plumbers home?
Martin A
EM, if you can't find a quote promising repatriation then anyone who though there was such a promise is..daft. Now who said anything about repatriation? It seems to me (being in Texas and not seeing the whole thing as you have) that repatriation was a remain scare, not a leave promise. It was a stretch, a straw man. Your plumber seems to have fallen for it. Perhaps naive is more appropriate than daft, but that is splitting hairs.
And it is a little dodgy for you, when a reference doesn't say quite what you want, to include it as a link so it isn't in your text to look silly.
rhoda
Martin A
You are like rhoda, another arrogant self-styled sophisticate with contempt for anyone less well educated than yourself.
I did advise Jeremy that he was mistaken, but he stuck to his view. Incidentally, I researched Jeremy's lost work. None of it has reached the internet, so you can accept my word or not as you choose.
Regarding your French residency, €5billion from expats is peanuts for the French economy. If necessary you are a bargaining chip to be discarded.
You may have missed the parliamentary vote on Tuesday.
Labour proposed a motion confirming that EU residents here be allowed to stay. It passed 245-2 because 325 Conservative MPs did not attend. Theresa May specifically refused to rule out deporting EU citizens.
I suggest you get your head out of the sand and start making contingency plans for a return to the UK.
Entropic man
Self-styled sophisticate? I have only ever styled myself as an Oxfordshire, and later temporarily Texas, housewfe. Neither I nor the leave campaign can be responsible for what someone believed based on no such statement from my side. If remain accused us of planning to repatriate, that was not only a lie, but a petard on which they were hoist. You omitted to provide a quote about repatriation from the leave side. I don't think they ever said it. As it was unsaid, who is to blame if your friend imagined it?
rhoda
Who has there head in the sand? Declaring one's intentions prior to any Brexit negotiations would be ludicrous, especially if we have to negotiate with Jean-Claude Juncker.
Martyn
Pre referendum interviews with Leave supporters on Sky, BBC, Channel 4 and ITV News programmes repeatedly showed people talking about immigration being their main concern. Implicitly or explicitly a decrease in immigrant numbers already in their neighbourhoods was demanded. Here it is being claimed that no such promises were ever made. More importantly few if any statements from the Leave leadership explicitly ruled out such possibilities.
Commentators here suggest EM should have advised his friend that his belief was wrong when he imagined immigrants competing for his jobs would be expelled if the Leave side won. Surely the Leave leaders should also have warned the whole electorate about the same?
Alan kendall
Martyn. If the electorate was never made aware of Leave's intentions before the referendum, what mandate can they now claim?
Alan kendall
Martin A
You have no evidence to support either assertion, just your usual naive optimism.
From Bloomberg