SURVEY: Brexit, do you support it?

[Grouse 9,170]

The present UK gov was not voted in by the people....The vast majority of UK folk did not vote Conservative..

How would you organise elections?

How do you expect to be taken seriously, Transam?

Get a proper V8; a Range Rover

At least it's British!

Indian?

No

Designed and built in Solihull.

[arjunadawn 4,610]

As the rhetoric ratchets up one thing is apparent: proponents of Remain are counting on people being stupid or being divorced entirely from history. Boris, pointing out the obvious fact that the EU political reach is but one more in a long line of charismatic or failed efforts to create a European Superstate, is actually being responded to as if lying by EU/ Remain apologists. Hitler, Napolean, Charlemagne, and pontiffs really are the predecessors to EU Superstate fantasies, this is indisputable. The difference is they were not deceitful nor did they couch their despotism in democracy. The further difference was the reliance on brute force rather then the soft force of the Leviathan regulatory state.

As Adam Lebor (Tower of Basel) points out in dailymail, Boris is actually 100% correct in his statement. There is an unbroken economic and intellectual chain to Germany's last reach for Superstate. Appalled or not, it's true!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3597410/Boris-Hitler-European-Union-ADAM-LEBOR-says-suffering-political-amnesia-EU-grandees-allies-British-establishment.html

Fewer things have been so pivotal over the years as this vote UK will make shortly. Two facts should inform the choices: those wanting Brexit comment on what is presently the state of things, and the deplorable state this is. Those who support Remain, solely recourse to fear, offering speculation and conjecture. There is very little to gain by Remain commenting on their success to date. The motivation is fear, threats, alarm, and falling skies.

After Obama came to UK soil and threatened its citizens little remains to be discussed.

[Grouse 9,170]

Oh dear!

Right enough.

How is it possible that so many people use the exact same terminology, including the exact same use of punctuation marks, and make the exact same rudimentary English mistakes in the same thread.

They must all have attended the same school with the same teacher.

You just don't stop do you?

Great job as spelling master

"the exact same"? or "exactly the same"? Please clarify

Clearly I upset you knucklehead

Upset me ? Do not flatter yourself. I pity you.

Let me explain.

I was brought up to be respectful and to pity those that were less fortunate than myself.

As someone who has continually posted throughout this thread and others, about the great unwashed and the low levels of education associated with those who support Brexit. You have constantly showed your own outstanding levels of intelligence. Some of these I have already highlighted, but let me remind you of your latest howlers that highlight quite clearly your intelligence levels.

Why is Clegg always so week? Is he a Clegg ( blood sucking fly ) 7 days a week or did you mean weak ?

Landrover has not been British for near on a decade. Never mind.

I am also a great believer in the old adage '' Never argue with an idiot, they will only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience''

I came to the conclusion months ago that you were always up for an argument debate, but did not have the grey matter to actually debate anything, resorting to throwing your personal favourites, those being the great unwashed and lacking in education.

For this reason, you joined my ignore list months ago. I still reserve the right to read and respond appropriately to whatever post I deem fit.

You now know why you joined my ignore list. Do not take it personally, I blame the schools.

Then do me a favour and actually ignore me

Your intelligence level is too low for me and I can't be bothered to tease you anymore

If you don't understand that Land Rovers are British designed and built though (currently) Indian owned, there is nothing I can say.

You also do not understand that typos and autocorrection sometimes result in bizarre spelling

So again, please do not waste our time with your small ideas. Thank you.

[Linzz 1,191]

You just don't stop do you?

Great job as spelling master

"the exact same"? or "exactly the same"? Please clarify

Clearly I upset you knucklehead

Upset me ? Do not flatter yourself. I pity you.

Let me explain.

I was brought up to be respectful and to pity those that were less fortunate than myself.

As someone who has continually posted throughout this thread and others, about the great unwashed and the low levels of education associated with those who support Brexit. You have constantly showed your own outstanding levels of intelligence. Some of these I have already highlighted, but let me remind you of your latest howlers that highlight quite clearly your intelligence levels.

Why is Clegg always so week? Is he a Clegg ( blood sucking fly ) 7 days a week or did you mean weak ?

Landrover has not been British for near on a decade. Never mind.

I am also a great believer in the old adage '' Never argue with an idiot, they will only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience''

I came to the conclusion months ago that you were always up for an argument debate, but did not have the grey matter to actually debate anything, resorting to throwing your personal favourites, those being the great unwashed and lacking in education.

For this reason, you joined my ignore list months ago. I still reserve the right to read and respond appropriately to whatever post I deem fit.

You now know why you joined my ignore list. Do not take it personally, I blame the schools.

Then do me a favour and actually ignore me

Your intelligence level is too low for me and I can't be bothered to tease you anymore

If you don't understand that Land Rovers are British designed and built though (currently) Indian owned, there is nothing I can say.

You also do not understand that typos and autocorrection sometimes result in bizarre spelling

So again, please do not waste our time with your small ideas. Thank you.

Mr. Grouse,

You won't progress by reacting like for like or pouring more oil on the flames. Allanos's last post sums up the best advice for forum etiquette. If you read it then you ignored it which is a pity, maybe re read it and we can all respectfully tolerate each other's rights to alternative opinion without resorting to insult.Yes? I have been prompting you in this direction too. Click bait is always unproductive. Others would be best to oblige as well.

Opps I sound like a moderator, sorry

Best Regards,

Linzz

[arjunadawn 4,610]

At any point one has lost the forest for the trees amidst the data and disassembly, return to what is known. The points raised in nontabury's post are the foundation of all things social and civil because these inherent Truths/Rights form all our social contracts.

Without sovereignty, elected local representation, and redress of grievences, people are no more then vassals, serfs, cogs, numbers- it makes little difference what they rationalize to sleep at night. (And no, Brits are not the only folks wrestling with this right now. But they are the folks must likely to stand up).

Only the core tenets contained in nontabury's post matter (the image I was unable to repost here); all other considerations are only reflections, not substantive. Only these truths make a community of the lives of Man worth living. History has been unapologetic regarding these truths. Every other arrangement is just aberration of legitimate government.

The EU is not a Democracy

Surrender the right to self governance

Surrender birth of soil to a foreign power

Surrender the community dos position of property, real, otherwise, finance, derivatives, education, borders... In essence, all things which constitute the glue that defines both a nation and/or its people.

Surrender authority in which your power is not loaned to a collective which in turn is loaned to one among you for leadership- stewardship.

Surrender to a Hobbian Leviathan comprised of distant, fallible, unaccountable, unknown, apparatchiks who's every act reverberates through your local courthouse, police force, coal plant, fishing grounds, school system, waterways, taxation scheme, repopulation schemes, as infinitum.

The earlier image is basically this distillation: the common denominator of what constitutes the fundamental duty of person's social contract, whether pondered or not, is a Natural Right that cannot even be abrogated as RemaIN insist, and has been effectively practiced. The core Rights often referred to are not archaic or problematic. These assertions are mentally retarded. It's circular.

Sovereign agency is the only valid form of being and autonomy. All else is grand larceny, and that's the point.

[chiang mai 12,655]

Sixty/seventy years ago the UK was a significant force in global affairs, the days of the Empire were still fresh, Europe was still a series of disparate countries and the US had not truly taken over as the worlds policeman at that stage. Today the circumstances are totally different, today is all about large and powerful entities, against which we will find if difficult to compete. So when somebody says to change matters from the inside rather than alienate and be an outsider, I can relate to that and I can agree. Perhaps if the EU were the other side of the planet I might think differently but it's our only near neighbour and it's only 22 miles away, we cannot afford to be out rather than in, not unless we want a GDP that is 90% of what it is today and are willing to accept the cost to the population accordingly. The other aspect of leaving is that we've put a whole lot of effort into grabbing business territory within the EU, leaving the EU risks losing much of what was gained in the hope that we may be able to gain some of it back as we go alone - that doesn't seem sensible to me, not unless the trade off is something truly significant and I've yet to understand what that might be.

When this debate started I said I was not biased one way or the other on this issue and that was true, I wasn't, but as the debate has gone forward I've quickly come down on the side of Remain. Why? Simply because the arguments in favour of Brexit don't stack up and the benefits of it are unclear. I've yet to see a solid case for Brexit that sets out numbers sensibly and logically and are realistic, all I see is lots of nostalgia, silly lists that are unsupportable and attempts to deride anything to do with the establishment and/or any perceived association of anyone with it. Sad as it may seem to some, there's little surprise the poll numbers are coming out the way they are, the case for Brexit has not been made in even the slightest.

I remember you saying at the start of this thread that you were undecided,however from your first imput I quickly came to the conclusion that you were,and are firmly in the remain camp.

You mention that if we do exit, our GDP we would be down to 90% of what it is today,my question to you is "WHY".

In the event of a Britex there is more chance of our GDP increasing,due to the fact we could make more trade deals with other countries, that's assuming that trade deals are the B all and end all of international trade. Personally I believe trade is based on supplying products that others actually need. And all these trade deals are is a way of circumventing protectionism.

Your post is a perfect example of what I see you do on the Remain issues that are presented to you, you're given an answer from a reliable source and you are suspicious of it and think the opposite must be true. In this case I have been honest and open with you regarding my feelings on Brexit and I've tried to explain the process I went through in the hope it would make others understand and essentially you accuse me of lying! At some point NB you simply have to believe that black is black and white is white.

As for the 90% figure: that's an arbitrary number and nothing more, whatever it should be it's a number that is less than 100 on the basis that if our trading capabilities outside of the EU were ever greater than within, we would never have joined in the first place. To think that by leaving we will suddenly increase our trade to say 110% is pure fantasy and not worthy of debate.

[chiang mai 12,655]

Sixty/seventy years ago the UK was a significant force in global affairs, the days of the Empire were still fresh, Europe was still a series of disparate countries and the US had not truly taken over as the worlds policeman at that stage. Today the circumstances are totally different, today is all about large and powerful entities, against which we will find if difficult to compete. So when somebody says to change matters from the inside rather than alienate and be an outsider, I can relate to that and I can agree. Perhaps if the EU were the other side of the planet I might think differently but it's our only near neighbour and it's only 22 miles away, we cannot afford to be out rather than in, not unless we want a GDP that is 90% of what it is today and are willing to accept the cost to the population accordingly. The other aspect of leaving is that we've put a whole lot of effort into grabbing business territory within the EU, leaving the EU risks losing much of what was gained in the hope that we may be able to gain some of it back as we go alone - that doesn't seem sensible to me, not unless the trade off is something truly significant and I've yet to understand what that might be.

When this debate started I said I was not biased one way or the other on this issue and that was true, I wasn't, but as the debate has gone forward I've quickly come down on the side of Remain. Why? Simply because the arguments in favour of Brexit don't stack up and the benefits of it are unclear. I've yet to see a solid case for Brexit that sets out numbers sensibly and logically and are realistic, all I see is lots of nostalgia, silly lists that are unsupportable and attempts to deride anything to do with the establishment and/or any perceived association of anyone with it. Sad as it may seem to some, there's little surprise the poll numbers are coming out the way they are, the case for Brexit has not been made in even the slightest.

I remember you saying at the start of this thread that you were undecided,however from your first imput I quickly came to the conclusion that you were,and are firmly in the remain camp.

You mention that if we do exit, our GDP we would be down to 90% of what it is today,my question to you is "WHY".

In the event of a Britex there is more chance of our GDP increasing,due to the fact we could make more trade deals with other countries, that's assuming that trade deals are the B all and end all of international trade. Personally I believe trade is based on supplying products that others actually need. And all these trade deals are is a way of circumventing protectionism.

I agree. The case for REMAIN has not been made by chiang mai and his posts are normally more substantive.

Apart from the fear factor homilies, that are being tripped out by naby, there have been no concrete reasons to stay in the EU.

I understand that many would prefer the expected status quo (I doubt it will be) to the risks associated with exit. I don't see that a reason to REMAIN.

If you read my posts again you'll see that I have never tried to make a case for Remain, I have simply said the case for Brexit has not been made.

[chiang mai 12,655]

Sixty/seventy years ago the UK was a significant force in global affairs, the days of the Empire were still fresh, Europe was still a series of disparate countries and the US had not truly taken over as the worlds policeman at that stage. Today the circumstances are totally different, today is all about large and powerful entities, against which we will find if difficult to compete. So when somebody says to change matters from the inside rather than alienate and be an outsider, I can relate to that and I can agree. Perhaps if the EU were the other side of the planet I might think differently but it's our only near neighbour and it's only 22 miles away, we cannot afford to be out rather than in, not unless we want a GDP that is 90% of what it is today and are willing to accept the cost to the population accordingly. The other aspect of leaving is that we've put a whole lot of effort into grabbing business territory within the EU, leaving the EU risks losing much of what was gained in the hope that we may be able to gain some of it back as we go alone - that doesn't seem sensible to me, not unless the trade off is something truly significant and I've yet to understand what that might be.

When this debate started I said I was not biased one way or the other on this issue and that was true, I wasn't, but as the debate has gone forward I've quickly come down on the side of Remain. Why? Simply because the arguments in favour of Brexit don't stack up and the benefits of it are unclear. I've yet to see a solid case for Brexit that sets out numbers sensibly and logically and are realistic, all I see is lots of nostalgia, silly lists that are unsupportable and attempts to deride anything to do with the establishment and/or any perceived association of anyone with it. Sad as it may seem to some, there's little surprise the poll numbers are coming out the way they are, the case for Brexit has not been made in even the slightest.

I remember you saying at the start of this thread that you were undecided,however from your first imput I quickly came to the conclusion that you were,and are firmly in the remain camp.

You mention that if we do exit, our GDP we would be down to 90% of what it is today,my question to you is "WHY".

In the event of a Britex there is more chance of our GDP increasing,due to the fact we could make more trade deals with other countries, that's assuming that trade deals are the B all and end all of international trade. Personally I believe trade is based on supplying products that others actually need. And all these trade deals are is a way of circumventing protectionism.

Where does this 90% figure come from? How has it been quantified; after all, no one can predict the future? Scare-mongering, perhaps?

See post 1046.

[Thaiwine 587]

I have thought what does remain offer, here are 10 examples of their arguments

1. Maybe we can bring about change in the EU from the inside

2. Maybe we can evade further integration

3. Maybe the world will turn their backs on us

4. Maybe Turkey won't join the EU

5. Maybe the economy will fail.

6. Maybe the pound will plummet

7. Maybe the banks will leave

8. Maybe there will be job losses

9. Maybe the jungle from Callis will move to the UK

10. Maybe we will instigate world war 3

The exit side is a little more positive

1. We can take back our country

2. We can trade with whom ever we wish to

3. We can control our borders

4. We can sack incompetent politicians

5. We can take our place on the WTO

6. We can spend our money on what we choose to

7. We can throw out some of the EU red tape

8. We can fish our own waters again

9. We can Make 100% of our own laws

10. We can take back our sovereignty

So remain have only maybe's

Brexit can do

[chiang mai 12,655]

Your list is too silly to even contemplate, the words, "we can" and "maybe" are equally interchangeable throughout the entire list, the headings are superfluous. One stand out worthy of mention is:

"We can control our borders" versus "Maybe the jungle from Callis will move to the UK" - I might interpret that to mean the Isle of Wight (or indeed all of Kent) will be turned over to the Immigration authorities to make one large holding tank for immigrants as the EU opens it's borders to a flood of people wishing to live here. Think how attractive of a solution that might be for the French Germans and others, send all the immigrants to the UK, they're not in the EU and they are an island!

BTW I'm leaving for the weekend, will pick up this thread again on Monday.

[Jip99 11,279]

Your list is too silly to even contemplate, the words, "we can" and "maybe" are equally interchangeable throughout the entire list, the headings are superfluous. One stand out worthy of mention is:

"We can control our borders" versus "Maybe the jungle from Callis will move to the UK" - I might interpret that to mean the Isle of Wight (or indeed all of Kent) will be turned over to the Immigration authorities to make one large holding tank for immigrants as the EU opens it's borders to a flood of people wishing to live here. Think how attractive of a solution that might be for the French Germans and others, send all the immigrants to the UK, they're not in the EU and they are an island!

BTW I'm leaving for the weekend, will pick up this thread again on Monday.

Enjoy your weekend.

I think many applauded your posts 1016 and 1019 which identified the foundation of many people's thinking. However, I also sensed a bias in your posts in favour of REMAIN and from that standpoint it is harder to see the case for BREXIT. I fully accept the argument against me that says my standpoint does the same against REMAIN - we are all essentially biased..

I think 'Thaiwine' at least had a crack at presenting a list of pro's and con's but (inevitably) they reflected his standpoint.

Someone can provide a list of all the evidence but two people from different ends of the BREXIT spectrum will make different judgements ie "that proves the case for ...." whilst another will say "no it doesn't". I think was the point made by 'allanos' after you cited old values, that are not apparent with the current EU, and then made judgement in favour of REMAIN.

There is too much smoke and mirrors, lies and deceit coupled with self interest to believe the words coming out from either camp. I do think the likes of Cameron and his cronies have made it easy for the likes of Boris and Farage to mock some of their statements - raising the fear of WW3 in the event of BREXIT is simply contemptible.

My reasons for favouring BREXIT are simply that the EU has become a monster. Joining the EEC 40 odd years was ago a sensible attempt at creating an economic grouping within the major powers in Europe. I do not think that anyone then could have envisaged how 'freedom of movement' could have been broadened so wide as to encompass the weakest of European nations. Mass economic migration was inevitable and I doubt that was the intention in 1973.

If someone had said that the UK would become emasculated as far as political decision making was concerned and, for example, immigration laws set by Britain (ie settling a Thai spouse) could be circumnavigated by entering under European domicile I doubt I would vote to join the EEC. If we knew than that directives would be brought in that stated "bananas must be free of abnormal curvature and cucumbers must be practically straight" we would have scoffed at joining such a bunch of retards.

Brussels has become Frankenstein's monster. It has sucked power from member states and fueled it's own cancerous growth to the stage where the EU is no longer the gentle cooperative that the EEC was promoted as. In short the EU is a long way from being the EEC that many signed up for. That the EEC had to develop/evolve over time is not in doubt - it is a fundamental hatred of what it has developed into that provides the foundation for me favouring BREXIT.

I was very pro-European and in many ways I still am. Any desire to leave the EU is not prompted by any desire to pull up the drawbridge. I have always believed in "if it ain't broke don't fix it" - the EU is 'broken' and Cameron's efforts to fix it have been appallingly inept. Even with that negative standpoint I could always consider the status quo as a possible favoured option to leaving the EU. Many people will do just that and that is why REMAIN will win the day - they will either not vote or will vote for more of the same.

Do I think the EU will improve (or fix itself) if we remain? Unfortunately, I can't see that happening and God help us if Brussels considered themselves empowered by what they would see as an endorsement.

So, I concluded that I don't like being part of what the EU has become and I can't see anyway it would change to reverse that conclusion. That being the case BREXIT is something that I needed to consider. It is all very well whinging and whining about something you don't like but a negative only approach gets you nowhere; I had to consider whether I thought leaving the EU could improve things.

Could all the things that I see as being wrong be corrected overnight by BREXIT? - of course not. Are there any risks, either short-term or long-term, for the UK associated with BREXIT? - yes, of course there are.

In the end I decided that what I saw to be possible short-term pain of exit, would be worth it for the long-term benefits of independence from the EU. Exit is not without it's risks and I can see why some would vote to remain on the basis that there no additional risks by staying with the devil you know. I have previously highlighted my fear that we do not have the politicians with the balls, or the political party structures to guide us through potentially turbulent waters.

However, I think 'sovereignty' - the ability to be democratically responsible for our own decision making - is a great positive. UK politicians would at least be accountable to their voting public for their decisions.

Immigration - I think the EU has helped to create an intolerable migrant situation and I am fundamentally in favour of each country having control of it's own border. A sensible immigration policy is something that can only be achieved through independence.

Ultimately, the question I keep asking myself is.. Is the EU something that I want to be part of and would I join now (or re-join if the membership was periodically renewable) ?

No. I am afraid I would not join or REMAIN. That being the case I personally must vote for BREXIT.

[cumgranosalum 4,062]

EU is a community that stretches from the Artic circle to Africa, from Asia to the Atlantic.

You can live anywhere ,work anywhere, travel anywhere without any hassle.......

How could anyone would want to throw all that away and believes they’d be better off bounded between Berwick and Bournemouth is just beyond belief.

[SgtRock 3,811]

Another staggering example of the smoke and mirrors, self interest and plain old not knowing @rse from elbow that has been highlighted by Jip99 above, and many others throughout this thread.

IMF.

The head of the International Monetary Fund has handed David Cameron a helpful pre-election gift, hailing the British economic recovery as “exactly the sort of result” she would like to see.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/16/imf-chief-hails-uk-economic-recovery

Yesterday, from a member of the BoE Monetary Policy Committee.

A top Bank of England policymaker has warned that even if Britain votes to stay in the EU, underlying weakness in the economy could mean that more support is required from the Bank.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/19/bank-of-england-interest-rates-cut-eu-referendum-remain-vote

This is why I no longer listen to any argument that involves the economy, financial meltdowns or trade wars.

The whole thing is smoke and mirrors and I honestly believe that no-one, has one iota of a clue what will happen in the event of a Brexit.

What will happen in the event of a remain vote is clear and unequivocal, Further Political and Monetary integration until Sovereign Nation cease to exist and become nothing more than satellite States of the EU. The next phase of this integration is due to start in 2020. That date was not chosen randomly. It is the date that all current opt - outs, less the euro end.

One has to look beyond the current white noise that is being produced in the MSM and do some background research. All this info is readily available on the EU website if you care to wade through the crap to get to the required information.

This is just not a vote on leaving or remaining in the EU. It is a vote on the very existence of the UK as we currently know it.

Whatever problems the UK has with trade and economy can all be rectified outside the EU. They will certainly not be rectified inside the EU. It is not possible to fix anything in the EU when the EU are in control.

This quote from a certain Mr A. Lincoln is very apt.

Government of the people, by the people, for the people

He did NOT say

Government of the business people, by the business people, for the business people

[Jip99 11,279]

EU is a community that stretches from the Artic circle to Africa, from Asia to the Atlantic.

You can live anywhere ,work anywhere, travel anywhere without any hassle.......

How could anyone would want to throw all that away and believes they’d be better off bounded between Berwick and Bournemouth is just beyond belief.

That doesn't wash either.

We (the UK) traded with the WHOLE of the rest of the world before joining the EEC and would continue to do so after leaving the EU.

Do you really think trade would stop ?

Geographically, Land's End to John O'Groats is fine.

[sandyf 6,294]

Talking about Bloombergs not knowing their @rse from their elbow.

From yesterday.

The pound jumped to a new two-week high against the euro and reversed its drop against the dollar after the poll was published. It appreciated 0.7 percent to 77.70 pence per euro as of 12:35 p.m. London time. The U.K. currency rose 0.4 percent to $1.4527, reversing a drop of as much as 0.4 percent.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-05-18/u-k-campaign-to-stay-in-eu-posts-biggest-poll-lead-in-3-months

Utter garbage.

The £ spiked against the $ and euro at the end of April before falling away again.

https://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/

Are you trying to tell us that the GBP/USD did not rise from 1.44 to 1.463 following the Queens speech?

Stop trying to read my mind Sandy. You are failing miserably.

I am not telling you anything. Other than the Bloomberg headline is misleading. The £ was higher against the $ on May 04. That was before the Queens Speech.

I am saying that the small rises and dips are most likely nothing to do with the EU referendum, but are no more than the normal currency swings. A movement of 0.02 is hardly a jump.

I am not going to follow you down the sewer but you are quite right I should go to the opticians.