Re: Remind me...
"That was always a lie to try and get votes back from UKIP."
And votes for UKIP.
16426 posts • joined 16 Jun 2014
"I think the
benefits outcome of leaving are, in fact 'less foreigners'"
FTFY. Whether the outcome is also a benefit depends on what those foreigners are doing. Where they're staffing hospitals and the like it might not be a benefit.
"although no-one is allowed to say that, quite."
It seems to have emboldened some quite nasty people to say just that.
"The fall in value of the pound is indeed a good thing.
Something the media have never understood."
ITYF that the media understand very well that the value of the pound is based on a reasoned estimate of the prospects of the British economy (that is, in the absence of fiddling with interest rates to try to buoy it up). If it falls it's because the rest of the world doesn't rate our prospects. Tell me why I should be pleased that the majority opinion is that we'll come out of this badly.
"If you want to stay in the EU I have a better idea, how about making arguments based on verifiable real world fact and/or data as opposed to FUD and opinion"
Yes, that's why we want to stay in the EU. We know what we get by staying in. It's what we have now. It's verifiable real world data, as you put it. What the Brexiteers offer is FUD and opinion.
"businesses that benefit from EU contracts and monies should relocate to an EU27 member state PDQ"
I doubt they actually needed a government warning for that.
The big question is how far does that reach? Any business that was established here by a foreign investor because the wanted a plant or office in the EU must clearly be at risk. Such investors might not yet have would up the UK business but you can bet (in fact, the leavers have already bet on our behalf) that they'll be looking at alternatives for future investment.
"About percentages at a referendum, the cleanest approach would be that at least 50% of the total electorate would have to have chosen for one of the two options. That way you could actually state that the will of the people is X. It would be quite hard for either option to reach that point, though."
Actually the cleanest approach is to have a substantial, say 2/3 majority for a change in the status quo. That means you don't go casting back and forth (even assuming you can and in this case we probably can't - once we're out we're out) on small sways of opinion or that you commit future generations to a potentially bad decision on the basis of a small majority.
"The difference is that we vote for our representatives to parliament, on the strict basis that they fill that role for a period not exceeding 5 years."
You said difference. Difference between an election and what? Let me spell out the difference for you. It's the difference between a period not exceeding 5 years and keeps. The maximum damage a bad choice in an election is 5 years plus however long it takes to unwind 5 years' of damage. The damage an irreversible referendum can cause can last for generations. We really need more commitment than a couple of percent majority.
"Things like manufacturing and tourism are already booming before Brexit has even happened."
What's pushing those at the moment is that the pound has dropped. The strength of a currency depends on the markets' judgement about the prospects of an economy. So the general view is that the economy will falter once the trade barriers go up. What trade barriers? Those between us and the greater part of our former home market.
We/re not ignoring your "good news", we're simply seeing it for what it is.
"Same for when you purchase something."
Except when you buy a pig in a poke. The sellers really don't want you to have a chance to change your mind.
For those of a curious mind a poke is a small sack. A con trick was to persuade punters to buy a poke containing an alleged piglet whthout seeing what they were buying. The matching saying was "letting the cat out of the bag".
"my mother (in her 80s, remain) says her leave-voting friends have not changed their minds"
Tell her to point out that the subsequent faltering economy will need a cut in their pensions. It still might not work because somehow the notion that it's only getting back what they paid in has stuck in people's minds.
"Holding a referendum on the terms of the negotiated agreement versus the status quo, now that people are much better informed, would be good for democracy."
And if that fails there will be demand for another referendum when reality strikes but by then it will be too late.
Experience is a dear teacher but there are those who will learn at no other.
"If you are one of the 99% who's job has nothing to do with the space industry, then who cares?"
And if you work in one of the other 99% who work in some other sector that is equally at risk then who cares when that too goes down the drain.
Effect on the UK economy: of your particular employer - insignificantly small and unmeasurable.
"Incidents are increasing too: the average number involving employee of contractor negligence has risen from 10.5 to 13.4."
What are the numbers here? Are they percentages? If so are they part of or in addition to the 64% mentioned in the previous sentence.
"75 per cent of respondents to a Dtex Systems YouGov poll identified using an encrypted file system to share confidential documents as important, but only 16 per cent had done so in the previous 60 days."
Yes, but how many of the remaining 84% had transferred confidential files in that time?
BTW, that speed limit analogy: show me a driver who's concentrating on their speedo so as to guarantee sticking within the arbitrary speed limit and I'll show you a driver who isn't paying enough attention to the road. Read right, it's a good analogy; you need to keep the whole picture in view and not just concentrate on a single detail.
"Only answer I could come up with (other than total insanity on the part of PHBs - which I can't rule out)"
The administrative mind runs on fixed processes. You have this job, you follow this process. It means they don't have to think. Throwing them out of that mode probably causes them the same pain that you and I suffer when deep in a complex problem and someone comes along looking for a time-sheet or progress report.
Insanity is probably close enough.
"A water bill is a far, far better piece of ID."
I'm not sure if this was sarcasm or not but in case it's not -
First off, utilities are trying to move us to paperless bills these days so neither a water nor other utility bill might be available.
Secondly, I occasionally visited the outsourcing site where my water bill and mobile bills were printed. Unused stationery was disposed of on a recycling bin outside. It would be very easy for someone to take a few sheets and knock up a false bill.
Thirdly, I worked in security printing for a while. No utility bill I've seen would count as secure base stationery. It would be straightforward for any jobbing printer to produce adequate fakes. In fact, I assume that photoshopped copies of most utility and bank stationery are in regular use by anyone wanting to establish a false identity.
"SNCF's ticket sales team is not on speaking terms with its ticket issuing team. "
They have no monopoly on that.
I had a meeting in Norwich (someone has to). I booked tickets with whatever entity was then running the East Coast line. On the appropriate morning I rolled into the sophisticated of Wakefield Westgate (the point of comparison is Wakefield Kirkgate) to ask for the tickets I'd booked. The train was rolling into the station while the clerk was still hunting for them - and I still had to buy a ticket for the car park, go out and fix it on the car, go back in and get on the train. It wasn't going to happen. I left him, got in the car and drove to Norwich.
As anyone travelling there from the North knows that drive, especially the A17, isn't much removed from interplanetary travel in terms of arduousness yet I still got there only about a quarter of an hour later than the train was scheduled to do.
It took a while to disabuse the company that they weren't entitled to withhold part of the refund of the tickets they hadn't provided.
"Moot point. The EU as we know it will not exist in 5-10 years time.
Leavers know this. Smart bunch we are."
Of course it won't. We all know that. It won't even be the same after next March. It's changed over time so its form in 5-10 years time won't be as we know it now and we will have no influence in the way it changes in 5-10 years (unless, of course, we return).
It will, however, be the neighbour that looms large in our economic environment and the former, much-missed part of our home market. Leavers aren't smart enough to know that.
"We disagree politically, so that's about the same as every general election ever then"
If you change your mind about a general election vote that's OK, the effect only lasts for 5 years at the most. If you change your mind about a constitutional vote affecting your countries relationship with others and which carries inevitable economic consequences, tough. At best, if you change your mind you're in for long negotiations to reverse it and you may only be able to do so at less advantageous terms than before. That's why its conventional for referenda to require a supermajority. And, of course, you decide before the event whether the decision is to be binding or advisory.
If you ask do I think such revisions to the EU treaties should have been subject to binding referenda requiring a supermajority, yes I do. That doesn't affect the fact that this has been an economically disastrous decision made in an outrageously stupid manner.
Don't diss the "remainers", they are a vital part of the Brexit strategy - any and all negative results after Brexit will be blamed on the remainers
Indeed that are. Because once the consequences start to bite everyone will claim to have been a remainer all along. It'll be the only way to avoid the blame. The outcome of the vote will be seen to have been a strange statistical anomaly.
"I think that voting leave will be worth any economic cost. And if we have a second vote, I'll still vote leave for that reason."
If you're not happy with what you see in a mirror I suggest you keep sharp objects away from your nose.
In the meantime my children and grandchildren are going to have to live with that economic cost in the longer term, or would have to unless they're able to take advantage of the fact that they're entitled to Irish citizenship.
But thank you for your exposition of the attitude that brought us this unthought-out mess.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019