| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
10 pager nqat
It'll be interesting to hear what the knuckle daggers think of our elected parliament debating and eventually making a decision that will affect the country, whichever way they choose.Originally Posted by TH63
1. You lost, get over it
2. UKIP should've had more seats in a first past the post system
3. Sour grapes etc
£ already up against the $
Remain voters are the only ones with a functioning brain you see.
Even though 99% of people I know voted remain and they haven't the slightest idea of politics or goings on in the world beyond headlines.
Shall we start debating the results of general elections? Because that is the equivalent.
We should absolutely question whether the process that lead to the result can be improved whether or not we can debate the result. If we moved away from FPTP the UK government would be far more representative of the country which voted for Brexit in great number but also pro-EU in great (slightly less) number - we would have more UKIP and more Lib Dems for a start.
We would thus end up politicians who were happy to debate what Brexit should look like rather than the unelected PM announcing it would be a hard and secretly forged deal which again doesn't necessarily represent the majority of leave voters nor represents the majority of MP's.
The process of debating information which the decision was made upon could hopefully be improved so that the only mention of £350 million for the NHS wasn't political comics suggesting it to sheepishly smiling Boris, Patel and co while they try and pretend it was never said. We could have hopefully had more debate like the Greek chap who said that no one will know what Brexit will do to the UK because nothing like it has happened around the world or Martin Lewis stating that both views could be taken up but this is what swayed it for him.
Absolutely we should debate the result of GE if it means more informed choices in the future and a more representative parliament.
Were you on holiday during the riots after the Torys won the last one?
As is being pointed out elsewhere, Leaver voters voted to take back control. This is a Briitish court applying British law saying the British pariament voted for by British people should decide what to do after the British people advised them in a referendum. This is democracy in action.
Parliament voted to put the vote to the people.
It was an act of parliament.
It is like debating the results of a general election.
This guy won't be happy: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...medium=twitter
I think it's a PR coup for the govt/leave camp.
They can play the outages card accusing the courts of undermining the will of the people.
Chances are then that the Supreme Court will overturn this anyway.
Remain voter by the way.
My family, all five of whom voted to leave, includes 3 first class honours degrees, a Cambridge university degree a masters and a doctorate. Not quite up to your C&G Spanner Throwing level 3 but we get by.
And did all of those five vote for the same thing? What was it they were expecting when they voted? It's all very well saying one side won and that should be an end to it, but there are so many nuances involved with both sides of the argument that a simple yes or no vote was never going to produce a united remain or leave camp.
Say at the end of the two years after Article 50 is invoked the Government announces that they were able to get a deal which more or less keeps us in the single market, but this is at the expense of several of the things people wanted done about immigration, do you think that will satisfy all of those who voted to leave?
Last edited by the other bob wilson; 03-11-16 at 14:03.
It was a binary vote - in or out. It was presented to the people as a binary vote. There wasn't a vote on the terms of leaving. Nor do I recall anyone calling for the inclusion of such a range of options in the referendum. Inevitably, barring some freak circumstance, one side was going to win. And unless there was a landslide verdict, a large number of people were always going to be unhappy with the result.
In any case, that wasn't my point. My point is that it is perfectly possible to have voted to leave and still be a reasonably intelligent human being. I ought to add that we'll have another member of the family with a medical doctorate next year.
This wasn't announced at 10am byany chance was it?
IMG_20161103_104943.jpg
Shares went the opposite way
Yes there's an obvious reason for that.
The underlying value of the companies won't have changed in any significant way, so if the pound is stronger then you need less of them to buy the shares in the company.
Likewise when the pound plummeted after brexit the ftse100 went up. This wasn't the companies increasing in value, just staying the same value but being valued with a weaker currency.
It'd be like increasing the size of a centimetre by 50% abd then being surprised that things measure less centimetres afterwards.
Fwiw I think it'll get through parliament without too much difficulty, as not many MPs will want to be seen as going against the majority of the population.
Th best thing about it is that the government will have to give away some of their plan in order to get it through.
I'm also doubtful that the lords will pass it
Democracy???
A case brought forward by a fund manager? You mean the financial markets get their own way over democracy.
A case of got enough money and you can get government to do what you want.
Last edited by Barry Dragon; 03-11-16 at 13:09.
It's a case of the elected UK parliament getting to do what they're there for. Which is what you voted for.
You mean like this fella
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics...-bought-brexit
Isn't the point that its now Parliament doing Article 50, not government?
And it seems totally democratic to me. Without this, an unelected Prime Minister could repeal a Bill previously approved by Parliament without getting their subsequent approval.
Brexit will still go ahead, but this means it'll go ahead with the ratification of Parliament. Anyone who supports Brexit should be delighted, I'm pretty sure the only reason any Leave supporters aren't is because they don't understand what has happened.
I think there are Leave supporters who will now be worried that Parliament will eventually vote and agree on a soft Brexit. There's never been a mandate for full and total withdrawal from Europe and all the initial suffering that will cause; indeed there are Brexiters who would now vote remain now they are more aware of what potentially could happen when we trigger Article 50.
Those on the far right will end up disappointed that they won't be able to stop foreigners but normal working people and those less fortunate won't have to pay such a heavy price.
There won't be a soft brexit. The vote was won because of FoM. No FoM means no single market.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote