Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 4)

[S600BSB]

AW111 said:

crankedup5 said:

Amateurish said:

turbobloke said:

As this is obvious the questioners who ask, some of whom call others 'stupid', will know that, and are using a specious question to continue stirring the pot and (it seems) feel better after not getting their own way. There there etc nearly 8 years on it's borderline pathological.

Can anyone translate?

Doesn’t need translating, just a little thought perhaps It’s saying people talk out of their backsides whilst simultaneously insulting those that they disagree with.

Now now, it's rude to say that about turbo. Although I won't say you're wrong.

Edited by AW111 on Thursday 4th April 13:02

Nearly 104,000 posts. The Great Grandfather of PH. Respect.

[CivicDuties]

More brilliant "it was worth it" news:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68726852

[Mortarboard]

turbobloke said:

Such people do <not> know best.

Quoted for the world's least self aware statement since the dawn of time

turbobloke said:

There there etc nearly 8 years on

Border controls update there yet? Expected this month isn't it? (Again)

M.

[Wombat3]

For balance:

https://www.politico.eu/article/police-fraud-finan...

seems as though there are thieving s & mismanagement of public funds everywhere.....

[turbobloke]

Wombat3 said:

For balance:

https://www.politico.eu/article/police-fraud-finan...

seems as though there are thieving s & mismanagement of public funds everywhere.....

Sure.

Human nature can't be changed by either socialism or remainerism, or any other ideology, there's a reasonable argument for saying that those failed ideologies make things worse.

Gorbals Mick (Labour, then Speaker) didn't go into politics not to take what was owed to him. Some tory muppet managed to stab himself with the sword of truth. As for desperate remainerism seen in the silly Ber Cow and fellow travellers, a lot has been said already on how democracy was a price we should never pay to placate any ideologue(s) who think(s) they know best; they don't and we didn't (fortunately).

[Killboy]

turbobloke said:

It was worth it because the democratic vote said Leave and no conniving politicians or blinkered activist remainers should ever be allowed to block or overrule a democratic result offered to voters and duly taken, as per the foiled attempts. Nor is there any visible wider point of benefit to continued whining.

Such people do <not> know best. At this point, living off falsified economic guesscasting based on inadequate models and the usual remainer gloom and doom won't do any more, not least as the definitive decision will always be unavailable - it's not possible to rewind recent history and change the result, then ffwd. Nor is it possible to disentangle the impact from other significant events including Covid, Ukraine and the religious zeal & spendfest of an unaffordable march over the cliff edge known as Not Zero.

As this is obvious the questioners who ask, some of whom call others 'stupid', will know that, and are using a specious question to continue stirring the pot and (it seems) feel better after not getting their own way. There there etc nearly 8 years on it's borderline pathological.

8 years and the only positive of Brexit was that we actually followed a democratic process (ironically disproving the some of the advertised issues of the EU), no matter how stupid it was?

If it wasn't for those meddling world catastrophes! Grrrr.

[Murph7355]

Killboy said:

8 years and the only positive of Brexit was that we actually followed a democratic process (ironically disproving the some of the advertised issues of the EU), no matter how stupid it was?

If it wasn't for those meddling world catastrophes! Grrrr.

Some might say despite the advertised issues given how piss poorly the whole process was defined, the abuse it made possible by both sides and the absolute weight of the political majority in both the EU, here and elsewhere.

It continues to baffle why a strong enough case could not be made to remain, rather than benefits in leaving. Doesn't it?

[Jinx]

Murph7355 said:

Some might say despite the advertised issues given how piss poorly the whole process was defined, the abuse it made possible by both sides and the absolute weight of the political majority in both the EU, here and elsewhere.

It continues to baffle why a strong enough case could not be made to remain, rather than benefits in leaving. Doesn't it?

Hope always trumps fear. Tony Blair knew that in 1997 ("things can only get better") and brexit offered hope whilst the remain side only offered fear. The current labour party is not offering hope (we're not the Conservatives and we are trying not to say anything at the moment just incase we rock the boat), nor are the Conservatives (stick to the failing plan it will get better - honest), the Greens only peddle climate disaster and the Libdems (the light greens) are only reminding us how bad our waterways are (though anyone older than 40 know they were much worse in the past) - out of all the parties it is only Reform that are actually offering a hopeful way forward (though a bit naive against the political ramifications of some of their ideas).

[Nomme de Plum]

Jinx said:

Murph7355 said:

Some might say despite the advertised issues given how piss poorly the whole process was defined, the abuse it made possible by both sides and the absolute weight of the political majority in both the EU, here and elsewhere.

It continues to baffle why a strong enough case could not be made to remain, rather than benefits in leaving. Doesn't it?

Hope always trumps fear. Tony Blair knew that in 1997 ("things can only get better") and brexit offered hope whilst the remain side only offered fear. The current labour party is not offering hope (we're not the Conservatives and we are trying not to say anything at the moment just incase we rock the boat), nor are the Conservatives (stick to the failing plan it will get better - honest), the Greens only peddle climate disaster and the Libdems (the light greens) are only reminding us how bad our waterways are (though anyone older than 40 know they were much worse in the past) - out of all the parties it is only Reform that are actually offering a hopeful way forward (though a bit naive against the political ramifications of some of their ideas).

It's a bit like the Brexit message. Make a promise you know full well you cannot deliver.

A person would need to be pretty naive to fall for the same B/S twice.

I do get that many can't cope with the complexity of government and life in general so need simple straightforward messaging and promised certainties which unfortunately simply do not exist.

Reform can offer nothing.

[Mrr T]

Murph7355 said:

Killboy said:

8 years and the only positive of Brexit was that we actually followed a democratic process (ironically disproving the some of the advertised issues of the EU), no matter how stupid it was?

If it wasn't for those meddling world catastrophes! Grrrr.

Some might say despite the advertised issues given how piss poorly the whole process was defined, the abuse it made possible by both sides and the absolute weight of the political majority in both the EU, here and elsewhere.

It continues to baffle why a strong enough case could not be made to remain, rather than benefits in leaving. Doesn't it?

The problem with making a strong case for the EU was it's complex and most people do not want complex answers. For example many only really knew about the EU from the media. So they believed the EU had banned bendy bananas. To be honest while I knew how international regulations influence EU regulation in my work I had no idea how far it applied in so many other area until I started to read EUreferendum.com. As it was remain decided to go all war and pestilence. Which did not work.

It also was a brilliant strategy by dom to have no plan on how to leave. He had seen in the Scottish referendum how the plan to leave was attacked. With no plan it could all be sunny uplands and unicorns.

[Pistom]

Mrr T said:

The problem with making a strong case for the EU was it's complex and most people do not want complex answers. For example many only really knew about the EU from the media. So they believed the EU had banned bendy bananas. To be honest while I knew how international regulations influence EU regulation in my work I had no idea how far it applied in so many other area until I started to read EUreferendum.com. As it was remain decided to go all war and pestilence. Which did not work.

It also was a brilliant strategy by dom to have no plan on how to leave. He had seen in the Scottish referendum how the plan to leave was attacked. With no plan it could all be sunny uplands and unicorns.

All very true and clear now.

The grass often looks greener. It's always easier to pick fault with what you've got than to see the benefits of your current position.

I suspect even many remainers didn't expect the st show we've now got.

Politically, promoting leave was always going to be the easier gamble.

Right now, it would be political suicide to openly push for a return to the EU as many don't recognise just how much worst off the UK is than if it would have still been in the EU and the pain is going to need to get much worse before those votes will turn.

The smart politicians will say - we're not returning to the EU whilst working towards closer alignment.

In time, just as is was an easier gamble to promote leave, the tide will turn for many to see a greener grass as part of the EU - but that kind of change will take time as most don't see the problems and the opportunity losses the UK is now suffering.

[nickfrog]

I knew it was a big gamble based on how strong the economy was back in 2016. But I was hoping it will pay off. The longer it takes to start paying off, the further the BEP. Time will tell. Or not. Who knows?

[Amateurish]

The mad "Brexit means Brexit" mantra from the Tories meant that we could only ever have the most damaging of hard Brexits available.

Why was there no serious consideration of a Swiss model, Norwegian model, EFTA, EEA etc etc

It was perfectly possible to respect the "will of the people" without shooting ourselves in the foot.

[nickfrog]

I am not sure it would have been ideologically acceptable.

But yes, the classic tautology is not that different to the level of utter imbecility of Love Island's nauseating "It is what it is".

[Pistom]

I think the Brexit means Brexit was felt to be needed as no matter how much it was going to hurt, anything less would have been political suicide.

It seemed to be for May. Even now, there are some saying it wasn't Brexity enough.

[rscott]

CivicDuties said:

More brilliant "it was worth it" news:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68726852

They're the prices for food entering through Dover and Eurotunnel - the border inspection/food safety checks are Defra's responsibility there.
At most other ports, they're run by the local councils, eg East Suffolk Council provide the Port Health services for Felixstowe and Harwich. They haven't announced their fees yet (they can't as they're still waiting for Defra to confirm some details about the processes).

But everything goes live on the 30th April, so they've got a few weeks to set tariffs, define processes and modify the systems, so I'm sure it'll all go swimmingly.

Be interesting to see the level they set the charges at, but given that they need to recover the millions spent building facilities (which may never be used because the rules changed several times), hiring staff (who they let go because the rules changed several times...), they won't be at the bottom end of the scale.


Possibly the only good aspect is that my other half is expecting to get a lot of overtime at the start of May - she works in the Felixstowe office.

[StevieBee]

Murph7355 said:

It continues to baffle why a strong enough case could not be made to remain, rather than benefits in leaving. Doesn't it?

It's far easier and sexier to promote something that doesn't exist because you can make stuff up or bend the truth or avoid mentioning the likely reality.

Think of it like buying a new-build house before it's been built. The developer can create a wonderful CGi render of what it might look like. They may even build a show home and promise all manner of virtues which convinces you to buy one. But on the day you move in, you find that the build quality is shoddy, there's a motorway at the end of the garden that's smaller than was stated and the garage is too small for your car. On reflection, you realise that despite all it's faults, it would have been better to stay put and fix-up the house you had.

[CivicDuties]

StevieBee said:

Murph7355 said:

It continues to baffle why a strong enough case could not be made to remain, rather than benefits in leaving. Doesn't it?

It's far easier and sexier to promote something that doesn't exist because you can make stuff up or bend the truth or avoid mentioning the likely reality.

Think of it like buying a new-build house before it's been built. The developer can create a wonderful CGi render of what it might look like. They may even build a show home and promise all manner of virtues which convinces you to buy one. But on the day you move in, you find that the build quality is shoddy, there's a motorway at the end of the garden that's smaller than was stated and the garage is too small for your car. On reflection, you realise that despite all it's faults, it would have been better to stay put and fix-up the house you had.

I think if we could beam back today's news about the effects of Brexit to early 2016 (i.e. not just today today, but in general what it's done to this country), then it'd be a pretty straightforward win for Remain.

And of course the supposed "project fear" predictions of Remainers have indeed materialised. I do need to point out, of course, that there was plenty of "project fear" in the Leave campaign - Turkey is joining, EU Army, Federalisation etc, none of which has in fact materialised, nor is likely to, 8 years after the vote. Remain has been pretty much entirely vindicated.

To deny this is to deny objective reality.

[Wombat3]

CivicDuties said:

StevieBee said:

Murph7355 said:

It continues to baffle why a strong enough case could not be made to remain, rather than benefits in leaving. Doesn't it?

It's far easier and sexier to promote something that doesn't exist because you can make stuff up or bend the truth or avoid mentioning the likely reality.

Think of it like buying a new-build house before it's been built. The developer can create a wonderful CGi render of what it might look like. They may even build a show home and promise all manner of virtues which convinces you to buy one. But on the day you move in, you find that the build quality is shoddy, there's a motorway at the end of the garden that's smaller than was stated and the garage is too small for your car. On reflection, you realise that despite all it's faults, it would have been better to stay put and fix-up the house you had.

I think if we could beam back today's news about the effects of Brexit to early 2016 (i.e. not just today today, but in general what it's done to this country), then it'd be a pretty straightforward win for Remain.

And of course the supposed "project fear" predictions of Remainers have indeed materialised. I do need to point out, of course, that there was plenty of "project fear" in the Leave campaign - Turkey is joining, EU Army, Federalisation etc, none of which has in fact materialised, nor is likely to, 8 years after the vote. Remain has been pretty much entirely vindicated.

To deny this is to deny objective reality.

I don't think anyone would have believed how much effort would go into subverting, dumbing down or trying to derail / overturn the result (from within the UK) either.

It was honestly quite enlightening just how many people were on the "democracy is OK as long as I win" bandwagon.

[crankedup5]

said:

Yup, some called it a betrayal of the people.