|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 9:38:20 GMT
I absolutely agree that it's important not to have it shoved in your face 24/7 and I have taken steps to ensure that I'm engaging with the news on my own terms at times that work for me (even if that means switching off someone else's car radio, luckily most people are very understanding about this), but I do think it's important to stay aware and engaged. The government rely on people not understanding their purposefully obfuscating ways of going about things, on people getting bored, on people not caring. The less fuss we kick up, the more they can just get on with what they want to do without any push-back. Even if your greatest engagement with the government is your single vote whenever there's a general election, you owe it to yourself and your community to stay informed. There are ways of doing this that don't involve having rolling news on all the time or spending money on blatantly biased print media, after all...
|
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Dec 13, 2018 10:35:12 GMT
I can't wait for this all to be over, which doesn't appear to be in the near future the way we are heading. I'm just so tired of hearing about it all the time. I follow politics and stuff when I can, but this is such a long drawn thing, I think alot of people are just tired of it. I voted Remain but if we have voted Leave then can we just get on with it already just so it can end. I agree with what's been said above; it won't be over, it won't end. In various ways, this is going to drag on and on for many years. And spare a thought for those whose lives have been put in limbo by this process, the 4.5 million UK-based EU citizens and EU-based UK citizens, who didn't get to even vote on their own futures. I'm sure they are just as eager for everything to be resolved, but not through being tired of it; rather, through having to live with anxiety and uncertainty about what will happen to them, what their rights will be, the possibility of having to pay to apply to stay in the place they have made their home, fallen in love, raised families. |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Dec 13, 2018 11:00:00 GMT
Pay to apply via a government-designed app, at that. Wonderful prospect, given the success rate of government-run IT projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 11:17:22 GMT
JDon’t think people voted Brexit because they were bored and we are certainly not in a mess, it certainly was a protest vote, you see with Trump being elected and other far right groups the world has tilted towards nationalism, The last time we had this was in 1930’s - so now Theresa has got a vote of confidents, what do you/she do now? No matter what people's reasons for voting for Brexit (I appreciate some may have had rational reasons for doing so, but I heard very few of those during the campaign or since, and a lot of people clearly didn't), I don't think anyone can say we aren't in a mess, unless you think a stronger word than mess is more appropriate (and I do). No-one can come up with a workable solution to the Irish border backstop (because there aren't any), millions of people are in limbo because they don't know what their rights to live and work here or in the rest of Europe will be a mere few months from now, the pound has tanked against the Euro and the US dollar, and all economic forecasts are predicting years of recession and economic and trade uncertainty. If that isn't a complete and utter mess, then I don't know what is. It all stems from the fact that a lot of people clearly voted for Brexit without actually thinking about how it would work and whether the timings were achievable, and and someone who fully considered my vote I find that very hard to stomach. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 11:46:01 GMT
The naivety/boneheadedness (delete as appropriate) continues. The deal that May has is not going to be renegotiated or changed in any meaningful way, so why are people thinking that (and these are just from a short section of radio listening this morning) 'we just need to put more pressure on the EU' or 'We have to mean that we will have a no Brexit to force the EU to change'? This is it, this is the compromise, reached the way that most European governments work, painstakingly trying to balance a coalition. There is and will be nothing else.
If people don't like this deal and think we should be given more time to get a better one then they really haven't been listening. Not having this deal means either no deal or no Brexit. A few weeks on an imaginary quest to find more unicorns isn't going to change that.
The vote needs to be before Christmas, leaving it just invites a no deal chaotic exit before anything can be done to stop it. I appreciate that Labour want the deal to fail on a vote in parliament before they attempt a vote of no confidence (and that point will be where parties split, if only temporarily, to make a last ditch attempt to halt the process) but we don't have time to faff about any longer.
|
|
5,707 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 12:46:50 GMT
Post by lynette on Dec 13, 2018 12:46:50 GMT
Gives NT longer to consider casting. Is Olivia Coleman available. Sorry if I appear flippant. Can’t help thinking that today's newspapers wrap tomorrow's chips but we actually can’t see the whole picture. I read a lot of Roman history.....end of Empire stuff. I recommend.
|
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Dec 13, 2018 12:59:37 GMT
And spare a thought for those whose lives have been put in limbo by this process, the 4.5 million UK-based EU citizens and EU-based UK citizens, who didn't get to even vote on their own futures. I'm sure they are just as eager for everything to be resolved, but not through being tired of it; rather, through having to live with anxiety and uncertainty about what will happen to them, what their rights will be, the possibility of having to pay to apply to stay in the place they have made their home, fallen in love, raised families.
That might be the part that makes me angriest, actually. I find it morally offensive and absolutely unjustifiable that people who moved here legally, who contribute far more to society than they take from it, who built homes and lives and families here, are being told to pay £65 each to apply for the right to stay in their homes. That is beyond disgusting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 16:32:56 GMT
This isn't the first time in history that people have been designated unwanted and threatened with being thrown out of the country they call home. Right now I'm struggling to think of a time where we don't look back on it as either an atrocity or a war crime, and I can't see that the future will judge this any differently.
Many countries have shameful events in their pasts. Our treatment of non-British residents is going to be one of ours.
|
|
2,342 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 17:58:36 GMT
Post by theglenbucklaird on Dec 13, 2018 17:58:36 GMT
The naivety/boneheadedness (delete as appropriate) continues. The deal that May has is not going to be renegotiated or changed in any meaningful way, so why are people thinking that (and these are just from a short section of radio listening this morning) 'we just need to put more pressure on the EU' or 'We have to mean that we will have a no Brexit to force the EU to change'? This is it, this is the compromise, reached the way that most European governments work, painstakingly trying to balance a coalition. There is and will be nothing else. If people don't like this deal and think we should be given more time to get a better one then they really haven't been listening. Not having this deal means either no deal or no Brexit. A few weeks on an imaginary quest to find more unicorns isn't going to change that. The vote needs to be before Christmas, leaving it just invites a no deal chaotic exit before anything can be done to stop it. I appreciate that Labour want the deal to fail on a vote in parliament before they attempt a vote of no confidence (and that point will be where parties split, if only temporarily, to make a last ditch attempt to halt the process) but we don't have time to faff about any longer. Labour Party wouldn't win a vote of no confidence now. Pointless calling it at this moment |
|
5,073 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 18:16:06 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Dec 13, 2018 18:16:06 GMT
I absolutely agree that it's important not to have it shoved in your face 24/7 and I have taken steps to ensure that I'm engaging with the news on my own terms at times that work for me (even if that means switching off someone else's car radio, luckily most people are very understanding about this), but I do think it's important to stay aware and engaged. The government rely on people not understanding their purposefully obfuscating ways of going about things, on people getting bored, on people not caring. The less fuss we kick up, the more they can just get on with what they want to do without any push-back. Even if your greatest engagement with the government is your single vote whenever there's a general election, you owe it to yourself and your community to stay informed. There are ways of doing this that don't involve having rolling news on all the time or spending money on blatantly biased print media, after all... So you turn off someone's car radio, but engage on social media which hits the sweet spot for posters confirmation bias?
I posted earlier if Mother Theresa is re-elected, what do you do now? Now the can will just get kicked even further down the road now.
|
|
5,073 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Dec 13, 2018 18:18:50 GMT
This isn't the first time in history that people have been designated unwanted and threatened with being thrown out of the country they call home. Right now I'm struggling to think of a time where we don't look back on it as either an atrocity or a war crime, and I can't see that the future will judge this any differently. Many countries have shameful events in their pasts. Our treatment of non-British residents is going to be one of ours. What about the shameful treatment of our own residents? |
|
|
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 18:40:07 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 18:40:07 GMT
So you turn off someone's car radio, but engage on social media which hits the sweet spot for posters confirmation bias? I mostly talk with my friends about their pets and what books we're reading, it's nice to use it just to be... well, social with my long-distance buddies. Also you may want to go back and re-read, I clearly stated that I do keep up with the news because I believe it's important to do so, so it's very interesting that you seem to have decided that I mostly ignore the news *apart* from, I guess, following it solely on social media? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 18:46:37 GMT
This isn't the first time in history that people have been designated unwanted and threatened with being thrown out of the country they call home. Right now I'm struggling to think of a time where we don't look back on it as either an atrocity or a war crime, and I can't see that the future will judge this any differently. Many countries have shameful events in their pasts. Our treatment of non-British residents is going to be one of ours. What about the shameful treatment of our own residents? Our own residents? What a horrible choice of phrasing. As far as I'm concerned our own residents are all those legally residing here regardless of where they come from. If you mean people of British origin, then say so. And if that is the case, then what shameful treatment exactly affects them but not others? Issues with the NHS and the welfare state affect all residents no matter where they come from, issues with racism affect specific races and cultures whether the people who belong to those groups are British-born or not. I could go on, but I think the point is clear. If what you actually mean is some sort of concept of British jobs for British people or anything like that, then the simple answer to that is there are jobs there if people chose to do them, and the fact that people born abroad are doing a lot of the manual labour jobs is as much because some British people (and some non-British as well, to be fair) have decided that claiming benefits is easier than doing an honest day's work. Those people are the problem, not the victims. The victims are those who are contributing hugely to our society yet not even being guaranteed a right to continue to do so. There is nothing that can justify such discrimination as far as I'm concerned, and I can't see how anyone could possibly defend it. |
|
999 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 19:44:14 GMT
via mobile
Post by Backdrifter on Dec 13, 2018 19:44:14 GMT
I absolutely agree that it's important not to have it shoved in your face 24/7 and I have taken steps to ensure that I'm engaging with the news on my own terms at times that work for me (even if that means switching off someone else's car radio, luckily most people are very understanding about this), but I do think it's important to stay aware and engaged. The government rely on people not understanding their purposefully obfuscating ways of going about things, on people getting bored, on people not caring. The less fuss we kick up, the more they can just get on with what they want to do without any push-back. Even if your greatest engagement with the government is your single vote whenever there's a general election, you owe it to yourself and your community to stay informed. There are ways of doing this that don't involve having rolling news on all the time or spending money on blatantly biased print media, after all... I posted earlier if Mother Theresa is re-elected, what do you do now?
But she won't be, if she keeps to her promise to stand down before the next election. |
|
999 posts
|
Post by Backdrifter on Dec 13, 2018 19:46:17 GMT
This isn't the first time in history that people have been designated unwanted and threatened with being thrown out of the country they call home. Right now I'm struggling to think of a time where we don't look back on it as either an atrocity or a war crime, and I can't see that the future will judge this any differently. Many countries have shameful events in their pasts. Our treatment of non-British residents is going to be one of ours. What about the shameful treatment of our own residents? I echo @posterj's question, what exactly do you mean by this? |
|
1,972 posts
|
Post by sf on Dec 13, 2018 20:21:53 GMT
This isn't the first time in history that people have been designated unwanted and threatened with being thrown out of the country they call home. Right now I'm struggling to think of a time where we don't look back on it as either an atrocity or a war crime, and I can't see that the future will judge this any differently. Many countries have shameful events in their pasts. Our treatment of non-British residents is going to be one of ours. What about the shameful treatment of our own residents?
That's PRECISELY what we're talking about: shameful treatment of legal residents of the UK - that is, of members of our society whose contributions are just as valid and just as worthwhile as yours. The fact that they hold other passports is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 22:51:02 GMT
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 22:51:02 GMT
If Brexit bill goes before Parliament around 21st January and was rejected. Labour call confidence vote the next day and if Government loses, I believe they would have to try and win a further confidence vote in the following two weeks otherwise there would be an Election in late Feb/Early March but if Parliament was dissolved then would Brexit go ahead and we crash out on a no deal?
|
|
|
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 23:49:19 GMT
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 23:49:19 GMT
If Brexit bill goes before Parliament around 21st January and was rejected. Labour call confidence vote the next day and if Government loses, I believe they would have to try and win a further confidence vote in the following two weeks otherwise there would be an Election in late Feb/Early March but if Parliament was dissolved then would Brexit go ahead and we crash out on a no deal? Not if parliament votes to revoke or extend article 50, which would be pretty definite in those circumstances. There is already a tacit agreement from EU states that they would allow an extension in the event of an election or referendum. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Dec 13, 2018 23:49:53 GMT
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2018 23:49:53 GMT
If Brexit bill goes before Parliament around 21st January and was rejected. Labour call confidence vote the next day and if Government loses, I believe they would have to try and win a further confidence vote in the following two weeks otherwise there would be an Election in late Feb/Early March but if Parliament was dissolved then would Brexit go ahead and we crash out on a no deal? We can stop, or at the very least, postpone Brexit I believe. Any new government would most probably do that as their first action. However, Corbyn would be a fool to force this at this stage - he doesn’t want to deal with Brexit. He isn’t offering alternatives, has ignored the issue occasionally in PMQs and hasn’t said he could get a better deal. Plus the DUP have stated they will continue to support May and Corbyn would still need almost every non-Tory MP to support him. The issue he faces is alienating his supporters that expect him to step in before Brexit if he decides not to, but would he risk the wrath of the public if he was able to establish a government and delay Brexit? Everyone is fed up of it and wants it sorted one way or another. He’s best leaving the Conservatives to it as I find it increasingly unlikely they’ll win a majority at the next election. I’m not sure anyone will, but stranger things have happened. |
|
5,073 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 14, 2018 0:11:46 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Dec 14, 2018 0:11:46 GMT
What about the shameful treatment of our own residents? Our own residents? What a horrible choice of phrasing. As far as I'm concerned our own residents are all those legally residing here regardless of where they come from. If you mean people of British origin, then say so. And if that is the case, then what shameful treatment exactly affects them but not others? Issues with the NHS and the welfare state affect all residents no matter where they come from, issues with racism affect specific races and cultures whether the people who belong to those groups are British-born or not. I could go on, but I think the point is clear. If what you actually mean is some sort of concept of British jobs for British people or anything like that, then the simple answer to that is there are jobs there if people chose to do them, and the fact that people born abroad are doing a lot of the manual labour jobs is as much because some British people (and some non-British as well, to be fair) have decided that claiming benefits is easier than doing an honest day's work. Those people are the problem, not the victims. The victims are those who are contributing hugely to our society yet not even being guaranteed a right to continue to do so. There is nothing that can justify such discrimination as far as I'm concerned, and I can't see how anyone could possibly defend it. What about the shameful treatment of our own residents? I echo @posterj 's question, what exactly do you mean by this? No it’s not a horrible choice of phrasing and it is this very attitude that made Brexit happen, well done. |
|
5,073 posts
|
Brexit
Dec 14, 2018 0:29:34 GMT
Post by Phantom of London on Dec 14, 2018 0:29:34 GMT
If Brexit bill goes before Parliament around 21st January and was rejected. Labour call confidence vote the next day and if Government loses, I believe they would have to try and win a further confidence vote in the following two weeks otherwise there would be an Election in late Feb/Early March but if Parliament was dissolved then would Brexit go ahead and we crash out on a no deal? We can stop, or at the very least, postpone Brexit I believe. Any new government would most probably do that as their first action. However, Corbyn would be a fool to force this at this stage - he doesn’t want to deal with Brexit. He isn’t offering alternatives, has ignored the issue occasionally in PMQs and hasn’t said he could get a better deal. Plus the DUP have stated they will continue to support May and Corbyn would still need almost every non-Tory MP to support him. The issue he faces is alienating his supporters that expect him to step in before Brexit if he decides not to, but would he risk the wrath of the public if he was able to establish a government and delay Brexit? Everyone is fed up of it and wants it sorted one way or another. He’s best leaving the Conservatives to it as I find it increasingly unlikely they’ll win a majority at the next election. I’m not sure anyone will, but stranger things have happened. Absolutely Jeremy Corbyn should go for a vote of no confidence in the government, Theresa May and her cabinet had a vote of 117 of her own party that had no confidents in her government yesterday, non of these mp’s that voted no confidence will vote against the government and risk a general election and risk Labour forming a government, but still these people have no confidence in Theresa May’s and her government add this to the opposition who will vote in a no confidents in the government, then although the confidents vote will be lost, when you add yesterday’s vote and a vote in no confidents - it will be there in black and white that parliament has no confidents in Theresa May and her government. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Dec 14, 2018 0:37:20 GMT
sf likes this
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2018 0:37:20 GMT
Our own residents? What a horrible choice of phrasing. As far as I'm concerned our own residents are all those legally residing here regardless of where they come from. If you mean people of British origin, then say so. And if that is the case, then what shameful treatment exactly affects them but not others? Issues with the NHS and the welfare state affect all residents no matter where they come from, issues with racism affect specific races and cultures whether the people who belong to those groups are British-born or not. I could go on, but I think the point is clear. If what you actually mean is some sort of concept of British jobs for British people or anything like that, then the simple answer to that is there are jobs there if people chose to do them, and the fact that people born abroad are doing a lot of the manual labour jobs is as much because some British people (and some non-British as well, to be fair) have decided that claiming benefits is easier than doing an honest day's work. Those people are the problem, not the victims. The victims are those who are contributing hugely to our society yet not even being guaranteed a right to continue to do so. There is nothing that can justify such discrimination as far as I'm concerned, and I can't see how anyone could possibly defend it. I echo @posterj 's question, what exactly do you mean by this? No it’s not a horrible choice of phrasing and it is this very attitude that made Brexit happen, well done.
I'm truly lost as to what you are trying to say. How can people attacking the cause of Brexit be the cause of Brexit? Are people supposed to not bring it up and hope that bigotry can be confronted through osmosis?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2018 0:40:55 GMT
Our own residents? What a horrible choice of phrasing. As far as I'm concerned our own residents are all those legally residing here regardless of where they come from. If you mean people of British origin, then say so. And if that is the case, then what shameful treatment exactly affects them but not others? Issues with the NHS and the welfare state affect all residents no matter where they come from, issues with racism affect specific races and cultures whether the people who belong to those groups are British-born or not. I could go on, but I think the point is clear. If what you actually mean is some sort of concept of British jobs for British people or anything like that, then the simple answer to that is there are jobs there if people chose to do them, and the fact that people born abroad are doing a lot of the manual labour jobs is as much because some British people (and some non-British as well, to be fair) have decided that claiming benefits is easier than doing an honest day's work. Those people are the problem, not the victims. The victims are those who are contributing hugely to our society yet not even being guaranteed a right to continue to do so. There is nothing that can justify such discrimination as far as I'm concerned, and I can't see how anyone could possibly defend it. I echo @posterj 's question, what exactly do you mean by this? No it’s not a horrible choice of phrasing and it is this very attitude that made Brexit happen, well done. And it is sweeping unsubstantiated statements like that which mean Remainers (If I must use such terms) are still none the wiser 2.5 years down the line as to why Brexiteers think Brexit is a good idea, or how they intend to make it work. Otherwise, your statement seems effectively to condone racial discrimination/elitism for British born people, which I fervently hope was not your intention. If it was, then I'm not sure you and I can debate much longer given your core values would be diametrically opposed to mine. So please, at least be dignified enough to explain what you meant, because the view I'm forming at the minute is not something I like at all... |
|
|
|
Brexit
Dec 14, 2018 0:51:16 GMT
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2018 0:51:16 GMT
If Brexit bill goes before Parliament around 21st January and was rejected. Labour call confidence vote the next day and if Government loses, I believe they would have to try and win a further confidence vote in the following two weeks otherwise there would be an Election in late Feb/Early March but if Parliament was dissolved then would Brexit go ahead and we crash out on a no deal? Not if parliament votes to revoke or extend article 50, which would be pretty definite in those circumstances. There is already a tacit agreement from EU states that they would allow an extension in the event of an election or referendum. If there was a vote of No Confidence and it was lost then getting a vote to postpone Brexit through would be very hard before 2nd confidence vote and not something hardliners would support. Imagine parties scrambling around to try and get a majority and to get a Brexit postponement vote won. If no deal is likely could EU step in and extend article 50, you cannot campaign for an election and still negotiate plus Parliament actually closes as once election is called all members seek to be MPs. Then with a snap election you have to find out who will stand again, who will step down etc. I think an election pre-brexit is something no one wants. |
|
|
|
Brexit
Dec 14, 2018 1:26:34 GMT
sf likes this
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2018 1:26:34 GMT
Not if parliament votes to revoke or extend article 50, which would be pretty definite in those circumstances. There is already a tacit agreement from EU states that they would allow an extension in the event of an election or referendum. If there was a vote of No Confidence and it was lost then getting a vote to postpone Brexit through would be very hard before 2nd confidence vote and not something hardliners would support. Imagine parties scrambling around to try and get a majority and to get a Brexit postponement vote won. If no deal is likely could EU step in and extend article 50, you cannot campaign for an election and still negotiate plus Parliament actually closes as once election is called all members seek to be MPs. Then with a snap election you have to find out who will stand again, who will step down etc. I think an election pre-brexit is something no one wants. There is a majority in the current parliament to avoid a hard Brexit (we know this from the Grieve amendment passing). As such, there would be a majority to extend article 50 in light of a general election being called or during negotiations for a replacement coalition. This is one area that we can be pretty sure of, that enough MPs (with prior agreement already there from the EU) will vote for an extension if it proves necessary. |
|
