paz1967
Vital Football Legend
i think enough shit has happened already to make rational judgment.. well, if your IQ is higher than 6
Here we go!
- Thread starter Pearced
- Start date
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Excuse me- it is perfectly democratic to hold a march to oppose a decision.
What you are saying there is dangerously disingenuous. You are effectively conflating a violent insurrectionist march like last week in Washington with a peaceful march to show opposition's to a decision.
They didn't march to "overturn" a decision in any sinister way as you insinuate. That's what right wing conservatives did in America. Remainers had a march of hundreds of thousands of people to show support for a second referendum.
A second referendum is not overturning a democratic vote. It is holding another one to confirm the decision.
I personally didn't take part in a referendum march but I did take part in an anti prorogation march. I'm not sure you have a leg to stand on with that one; it was certainly the most amti-democratic act of my lifetime
da fuq
Vital Champions League
I do feel genuinely bad for her children and grandchildren - what a legacy - but she did this to her self and is now impacting her family bussiness and others that are connected to her
There are millions who will start to realise what a massive own goal they have scored but becuase of the media they will take no responsibility and blame everyone but them selves
It's only week 3
Shit is about to get real ..even I didnt think it was going to start happening this quick
Maybe we need to reevaluate project reality and call it "Project we fucking told you"
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/busin...k.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
There are millions who will start to realise what a massive own goal they have scored but becuase of the media they will take no responsibility and blame everyone but them selves
It's only week 3
Shit is about to get real ..even I didnt think it was going to start happening this quick
Maybe we need to reevaluate project reality and call it "Project we fucking told you"
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/busin...k.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
Last edited:
da fuq
Vital Champions League
Well when you have a belief in the supernatural and defy logic and commonsense and dismiss experts
Science and the advancement of us as a species is usually one of the first things to go
All leave voters
"Dunk the witch"
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
She didn't do this to herself. Had she voted the other way she would still be facing this.
It's incredibly hard and I fail at this every day, because what they have taken from us and themselves is so important and precious. It feels unforgivable. But you have to try to hate the liars, not the dupes.
Remember- the liars don't have to be senior politicians.
da fuq
Vital Champions League
Sorry if I dont believe someone who has facilitated lies and gets his ass handed to him every day on his Brexit bullshit
Working time directive
"Those three words don't mean much to most people.
How about KEEPING PAID HOLIDAYS? Yes... PAID HOLIDAYS!!!! Imagine not having paid holidays. It's the thin end of the wedge that ends with total workplace 'flexibility' where everyone ends up on zero hours contracts. No holiday pay, no sick pay, longer working hours, no job security.
Couldn't happen here? If you believe that, you haven't had your eyes open for the last ten years as your services have been slashed, pay stalled or reduced, and your taxes given to private companies. THIS IS REAL!
The Government is talking about scrapping paid holidays with the 'working time directive'. Whether you work for a great company or a dodgy one - for the last 20 years everyone should get at least 20 days paid holiday.
Before we got the ‘working time directive’, bad bosses didn’t have to pay you for holidays. The law also means your boss can’t force you to work more than 48 hours a week if you don’t want to. These laws are there to protect everyone. To make sure dodgy bosses can’t exploit people in the UK.
"Worker protection including the 48-hour week — would be ripped up under plans being drawn up by the government as part of a post-Brexit overhaul of UK labour markets."
da fuq
Vital Champions League
When the votes was swayed by only a few hundred thousand people she did do this to herself
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
Maybe your mate JC should have stood up to the liars more when it mattered in 2016, rather than sympathising with them
Strett
Vital Football Hero
It want happen.
Strett
Vital Football Hero
Predictably, Labour and the country’s rump of Brexit refuseniks claim that this is an assault on workers by swivel-eyed Thatcherites.
This seems unlikely. Ministers hardly look like they are spoiling for a fight against the unions and there is little evidence that the EU working time directive directly limits UK activity, since there are few contracts clustered around the thresholds it sets for hours. The rules do, however, impose an arduous administrative burden on employers to record staff hours in a particular way.
As with Covid vaccine procurement, it is not about the ends, but the means of getting there.
This seems unlikely. Ministers hardly look like they are spoiling for a fight against the unions and there is little evidence that the EU working time directive directly limits UK activity, since there are few contracts clustered around the thresholds it sets for hours. The rules do, however, impose an arduous administrative burden on employers to record staff hours in a particular way.
As with Covid vaccine procurement, it is not about the ends, but the means of getting there.
da fuq
Vital Champions League
He's not mys
He's not my mate
I see you are still incapable of not doing the politics of personality but I did believe in most of the vision that Labour set out
There is a lot of blame to go about and not having Labour in power after the last 2 elections because of people like you is a big reason
Dont care if you say you voted for them or not you obviously did enough to facilitate the Tories to win the last 2 elections and no matter what you say you need to take some personal responsibility
He's not my mate
I see you are still incapable of not doing the politics of personality but I did believe in most of the vision that Labour set out
There is a lot of blame to go about and not having Labour in power after the last 2 elections because of people like you is a big reason
Dont care if you say you voted for them or not you obviously did enough to facilitate the Tories to win the last 2 elections and no matter what you say you need to take some personal responsibility
As ever you look at what I posted and make a thousand assumptions.
I said a march, no mention of Trump, violence etc that's a slant you have put on it.
The March was to get a second referendum to overturn the first one. That's not democracy. It is disingenuous to say it was "to confirm the first one". It was clearly to try and overturn it. Remain shouldn't have been on any second referendum. What would have happened if Remain won the second referendum. What would have happened if Remain had won the first referendum ? Would we still have had a "confirmatory" second referendum to confirm we did really want to REmain ? If Remain won the second referendum, would we have had a third to decide the situation ? Best of 5, 7 where do we stop ? WE voted to Leave, decision made.
I would bet my IQ matches most on here. Insulting 17.4 million people doesn't exactly add much to the argument.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
You know that is a nonsense.
I am a decade long member of the Labour party.
You have already made more anti Starmer posts in 10 months than i made criticisms of Corbyn ever.
My point is justified
If you wanted fishing woman to make a different decision, Corbyn needed to step up in 2016. He was the single most important person in the remain side's armoury and he was actually desperate to bat for the other team.
He championed remain with the same enthusiasm as I present to staff about new Ofsted inspection criteria.
You can't get away from that DF. You can make up nonsense about a labour party member from Nottingham being responsible for two election defeats all you want. It's just gaslighting nonsense and every single person on this forum knows you are talking a load of old pony. On this you are in an echo chamber in your own head. You might as well just drop it.
My point about Corbyn was not an attack on you personally, but even you must find it hard to square your (understandable) support of Corbyn with what can only be described as betrayal in 2016.
Strett
Vital Football Hero
Insults are generally used in the absence of reasonable debate.
I didn't get a democratic vote in pro-rogation. It was decided in a court, not by people marching.
Strett
Vital Football Hero
Part of a great opinion piece this morning...
The British state has hardly shown its best side since the start of the pandemic or, indeed, since the Brexit vote. Both Covid and the Brexit negotiations have provided ammunition for those who argue that Britain is no exceptional, great power but an averagely run country whose autonomy won’t change much because cooperation, bureaucratic expertise and scale are what really count in the modern world.
Kate Bingham, the ex-head of the vaccine task force was asked this week how she had managed to secure supplies of the most promising vaccines so quickly. Her answer: “We were quick and nimble. We were clearly not the largest buyer. The US and the European Union are much more substantial buyers than the UK, yet we were both the first to secure the contract and the first to deploy.” The venture capitalist also described how she had drawn on her contact book to hire the right people and build relationships with the vaccine front-runners at lightning speed.
In other words, the decision to stay out of the EU’s vaccine procurement programme paid off. The conditions for joining, Ms Bingham explained, had been too arduous, requiring the UK to abandon existing negotiations and forgo any independent deals with promising suppliers in future. Politely, she didn’t mention the other ball and chain around the leg of EU vaccine procurement: the catastrophic dilution of public health goals by nationalist industrial policy, which limited the EU’s early engagement with the US-German partnership, Pfizer-BioNTech, and drove it to waste time on the UK-French alternative developed by Sanofi and GSK.
Brexit was not intrinsic to this decision. The UK was invited to join the EU programme despite leaving the EU, and if we had remained, we could still have opted out. But whatever happens with vaccine distribution, the divergent fortunes of the two procurement schemes provide strong evidence in favour of one argument for Brexit: the idea that political coherence, nimbleness and the ability to tailor policy to one set of interests, rather than 28, all matter more than scale.
This was a difficult debate to have in theory. Critics of Brexit have repeatedly demanded to know what it is “for”. Some Brexit voters would answer that the point is to deregulate and cut taxes. Others would say it’s to reduce immigration. I contend, however, that most Brexit supporters simply had a general sense we would be able to run our affairs better without moulding our laws around compromises designed to accommodate very different economies and societies. It’s not that Britain is some sort of alien species among European nations, harbouring a desire to go back to coal mining and colonisation. Our aims are similar to those of other Western countries. It’s just that the particular way we pursue them does, in fact, matter.
This should not be a controversial idea. One theory of Europe’s development from the Renaissance onwards is that it was precisely the competition for talent and technology that drove the continent forwards so quickly, rather than the modern notion that large blocs are beautiful.
The British state has hardly shown its best side since the start of the pandemic or, indeed, since the Brexit vote. Both Covid and the Brexit negotiations have provided ammunition for those who argue that Britain is no exceptional, great power but an averagely run country whose autonomy won’t change much because cooperation, bureaucratic expertise and scale are what really count in the modern world.
Kate Bingham, the ex-head of the vaccine task force was asked this week how she had managed to secure supplies of the most promising vaccines so quickly. Her answer: “We were quick and nimble. We were clearly not the largest buyer. The US and the European Union are much more substantial buyers than the UK, yet we were both the first to secure the contract and the first to deploy.” The venture capitalist also described how she had drawn on her contact book to hire the right people and build relationships with the vaccine front-runners at lightning speed.
In other words, the decision to stay out of the EU’s vaccine procurement programme paid off. The conditions for joining, Ms Bingham explained, had been too arduous, requiring the UK to abandon existing negotiations and forgo any independent deals with promising suppliers in future. Politely, she didn’t mention the other ball and chain around the leg of EU vaccine procurement: the catastrophic dilution of public health goals by nationalist industrial policy, which limited the EU’s early engagement with the US-German partnership, Pfizer-BioNTech, and drove it to waste time on the UK-French alternative developed by Sanofi and GSK.
Brexit was not intrinsic to this decision. The UK was invited to join the EU programme despite leaving the EU, and if we had remained, we could still have opted out. But whatever happens with vaccine distribution, the divergent fortunes of the two procurement schemes provide strong evidence in favour of one argument for Brexit: the idea that political coherence, nimbleness and the ability to tailor policy to one set of interests, rather than 28, all matter more than scale.
This was a difficult debate to have in theory. Critics of Brexit have repeatedly demanded to know what it is “for”. Some Brexit voters would answer that the point is to deregulate and cut taxes. Others would say it’s to reduce immigration. I contend, however, that most Brexit supporters simply had a general sense we would be able to run our affairs better without moulding our laws around compromises designed to accommodate very different economies and societies. It’s not that Britain is some sort of alien species among European nations, harbouring a desire to go back to coal mining and colonisation. Our aims are similar to those of other Western countries. It’s just that the particular way we pursue them does, in fact, matter.
This should not be a controversial idea. One theory of Europe’s development from the Renaissance onwards is that it was precisely the competition for talent and technology that drove the continent forwards so quickly, rather than the modern notion that large blocs are beautiful.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
First of all, I thought we had agreed to drop attack lines like you have opened with. It's either detente or it's not; I am not calling off the dogs unilaterally. Make your decision.
In this week if January, you don't talk about a "march to overturn a result" without it having a direct correlation to world events. Wriggle out of it all you like, those terms are extremely loaded right now and if that was not what you were thinking, you should have chosen your words far more carefully.
Remain was the status quo. There is no need for a confirmatory referendum when the decision is no change. The purpose of a confirmatory is to confirm the decision once the implications and specifics of the change are known.
Your wife got two chances to decide if she wanted to marry you; once when you asked her, and another at the altar. When I go to Tesco today, I have two chances to decide whether I want an item; when I put it in my basket and when I go to the till. If I pick an item off the shelf and decide to put it back, I don't need to think about it again at the till to I?
The reality of what brexit means was very different to what was said in 2016. It is an absolutely massive decision affecting millions of young people for decades to come. It feels appalling that such a decision was taken by just one vote, in one time and context, by one group of voters on behalf of millions of others. How can you not think it your duty to history to make sure this was right?
And besides, let's not pretend; the single reason why you and other leavers did not want a second referendum was because you were not at all confident you would win it. If polls showed 70% for brexit you would have been all in favour to put the issue to bed.
Just as Sturgeon is desperate for a Scottish referendum now and Johnson is desperate to avoid one; it is almost always the case that the people who know they are going to lose are the ones that don't want a referendum.
If in the future we have a referendum to rejoin the EU should we have two, with a confirmation referendum? Of course we should, because that would be a major change and people should get another chance to confirm the decision once they know the true implications.
But we won't have two, because the craven nature of senior brexit politicians has set the precedent.
Pope John XXIII
Vital Football Legend
That is utterly irrelevant to the point
