JoeLeg

TheCat- I also have every intention of replying to your lengthy post; it?s just that I?m swamped in work right now and can?t give it the attention it merits (I mean that in a good way). Be assured, I?ll get on it in a day or two. You?ve obviously putvthough into it and it doesn?t deserve some half-formed 140 characters of nonsense.

Whatever mate...

Don?t be idiotic Sue. You know full well Rendell is capable of going back and forth on something until the sun comes up. The fact you and someone else disagree on something doesn?t automatically mean they don?t have an answer for you.

Farage told Peston that a second referendum is preferable to May?s Deal. (Caveat, I haven?t seen the whole interview) Not sure how he squares that circle? Only last week he said he would be forming a new Brexit party if we didn?t Leave on the 29tb Mar h. I thought he was all about No Deal? There?s a lot of brinkmanship going on right now.

Don?t worry, Foxy?s already admitted he was just trolling. He?s too good to take part in discussions with people like us. He thinks it?s all a laugh.

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JoeLeg Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Jesus Foxy...potatoes by the pound? Trivial? > > Seriously? > > > > > > I?d genuinely like to know some of the other > rules > > and regulations you objected to. > > I was being facetious.. > > I have no real desire to enter into debate on the > matter. > > > Fox This is why people get annoyed at you. Back to the kids table with you...

Jesus Foxy...potatoes by the pound? Trivial? Seriously? I?d genuinely like to know some of the other rules and regulations you objected to.

TheCat I use the phrase ?some Leave voters? because I?m aware not every Leave voter thinks the same, and immigration is a hugely divisive issue. Some people voted Leave for racist reasons, though we have no way of knowing how many. It was likely a small minority, although I suspect the number who voted to stop FOM for legitimate reasons is far higher. I would say you?re different from the perception of the immigration issue that the Leave campaign was happy to propagate in order to win votes (Remain was just as bad in its own ways, ergo my oft-repeated view that both sides behaves abysmally). Hardly anyone on the Leave side put the argument about economic low-skilled migrants in the terms you just did - there was an awful lot of commment about how British firms didn?t pay enough for Brits to take the jobs, or that these migrants were taking up school places and welfare payments that should be for Brits. Very little was spoken about the benefits of migration - Leave literally ONLY had ?points-based system, Like Australia?, which they spouted loudly and was the FIRST thing shot down by May when she took office. I agree with you that a sensible govt would speak plain truth to it?s citizens about what we need and how we will manage it, but know govt has done it thus far. People on both sides of the debate need to wake up to certain realities, and it concerns me because there?s a lot of hostile feeling regarding foreigners, which is historically something this country has been good at, going all the way back to the Hugeonots. Remain screwed up by painting all immigration discussion as racist, and Leave openly lied about Turkey. Immigration is so central to many people?s vision of what we should be post-Brexit, and I?m personally worried that the govt is hoping no one notices that it?s basically not doing anything about it.

I think there?s a real ?head in the sand? mentality with some Leave voters where immigration is concerned. One thing that no one has been able to e plain to me - and I?ve asked repeatedly, here and elsewhere, online and in person, is WHO is going to do the low-skilled jobs if it?s not immigrants? We have record levels of employment, and yet there seem to be a lot of non-British people in the workforce. And we haven?t left the EU yet. I somehow doubt those foreigners are going to go away. Look, I know that people voted Leave for many reasons, but it?s the immigration argument that sticks in my throat like a dirty fish bone. Economic migrants don?t go where they can?t get work, and as Diable says, govts have repeatedly failed to implement their right to deport people who are just hanging around being a drain on the system. Frankly too many Leave voters were happy to look the other way while Nigel and Boris lied (and lied is the word) about Turkey, because it got them what they wanted. Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. Cummings reckoned it was good for 650,000 votes.

This isn't meant as a dig, but do you not see a contradiction in your position that you're voting to end FOM (I acknowledge that wasn't your only reason for voting Leave), while you yourself were able to take advantage of the same FOM beforehand to enter the country without needing a visa? If you'd been 100% Ozzie it would get more complicated for you. It seems slightly like bolting the stable door behind you.

TheCat wrote I > still came here based on 'Freedom of movement' > using my EU citizenship Did you come to the UK from Australia using EU FOM rules?

uncleglen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keano77 Wrote > > Why are they annoyed? There are a fair number of > undesirables who have been attracted to this > liberal charitable country of ours...even the > Romanian mayor thanked the UK for taking the > Romanian criminals- where my sister lives in Essex > they are sick of the anti-social behaviour in > their neighbourhood alone. Interesting. I know someone who runs a succcesful restaurant and hotel in Essex; she says a lot of the local Brits are workshy layabouts who want something for nothing, and as a result she staffs mostly with immigrants. She herself came here from Russia fifteen years ago. I?ve got two Romanians working for me right now, and there?s a well known restaurant in Peckham that?s basically - behimd the scenes - run by a Romanian chef who works about seventy hours a week because the English owners are lazy. Still, send ?em all back, eh? British jobs for British workers! Who, erm, don?t seem up to it...

That would at least be one upside to it!

To judge from the (comparatively extremely small) sample of EU citizens that I know well, none of them seem particularly annoyed or offended by it, any more than by any other piece of admin they have to deal with. They do feel that the govt could have handled the whole thing better, but they?re hardly alone in that. However, a dozen or so immigrants in south east London is hardly a statiscally acceptable number so I could be wrong.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Reed Mogg is articulate and well practiced in the > art of debating. He is all the dangerous for that. Oh I agree. He?s not someone I would ever vote for and there?s myriad things on which I disagree with him, but I feel credit where credit is due, there are aspects of his Leave position which I respect. Shares of grey and all that...

Well, so long as they pay to stay then it?s not true. But as even JRM said this morning, that?s grossly unfair and should not be happening. If they don?t pay, then by definition they won?t have settled status and will have to leave at some point. I think the point DR (and Mogg) is making is that it?s a pretty dishonourable way of going about things in terms of people who have lived and paid taxes here, to tell them they have to stump up the cost of staying if they want to. ?65 may not be much to many people, but the principle is what matters here.

Listened to Rees-Mogg on LBC today. Apart from his dogmatic adherence to No Deal (and certain applications of his religious faith, but that?s another story), he?s a pretty reasonable guy. I particularly respected his stance on EU nationals in the U.K.. He?s kind of like a mirror image on Corbyn on some ways. Likely an excellent local MP, and a good backbencher but would make a terrible PM. Where he has it over Corbyn (and Boris) is that at least with JRM you know what he believes. There?s plenty about him that I disagree with, but this morning I was impressed with quite a lot of what he said.

jenny pink Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rendelharris... > How patronizing,you are.... Hello pot? Hello? This is Kettle here? YOU are the one in > doubt,so why Don't YOU invesatigate with pet > owners,who use Homeopathy for their pets.. Doubt and well-informed scepticism are not the same thing. .I > 'KNOW' it does work,for humans too... No you don?t. You believe it does, which is not the same thing. ..one can > lead a horse to the water...springs to mind Much the same can be said of you, with your wholesale dismissal of modern medical practice. Have you ever needed the assistance of A+E or an operation or anything?

Wow. So many straw man arguments that plainly there?s no point with you. Whatever mate, whatever...red lights are the law of the road and nothing you can say will change that. If I?m crossing on a green an a cyclist comes through on a red then I?ll remind myself that you said it?s ok. ETA - I find the idea that a road user - of any hue - can be trusted to jump a red ?when it?s safe? as it were to be laughable in its thoughtlessness. If you?ve done it once you?ll do it again, and again, and then one day you?ll do it when it isn?t so safe...

Right. So you?ve got yourself a justification for people to jump red loghts. I refer you Rendel?s earlier posts on that specific matter, and invite you to do one, given that you think the rules of the road somehow don?t apply to you.

Aaaaaand he?s back! Or most likely will be. Great. You know what? I have no problem with such a party being involved, I really don?t. It?s the rest of the political/social views of the people involved that are disgusting. Catherine Blaicklock?s stuff makes me want to wash my mind out with bleach. So long as they stick to the Brexit issue, fine. But the rest of their Little Englander opinions can #%*^ right off. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/20/nigel-farage-to-lead-new-pro-brexit-party-if-eu-departure-delayed-ukip

Roland essentially clarifies what was - for me - the main argument against voting Leave; no one could tell me, not even a little bit, what we were voting for. I know a lot of people saying ?I knew what I was voting for?, but when we don?t know what?s Leaving will actually entail, how can that be true? The EU has many problems, but the Brexit crowd asked us to vote for an idea with no solid plans behind it. The current situation is exactly where I feared we would end up.

Interesting view from a Leave voter...

keano77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I?ve never looked into it but I don?t understand > why there would be shortages of medicines. > > Do the EU gangsters control the supply, on some > country-lines basis? Why can?t we buy them from > elsewhere eg the US? The yanks pop pills until > they?re coming out of their ears so should have > plenty. I'm not entirely sure why this should be either - I can't see anyone being a jobsworth over life-saving medicines when it comes down to it. That said the pharmaceutical companies seem to think this is a thing, and the govt has slapped them all with NDA's, which says to me there's an issue somewhere. Personally I wouldn't want to touch anything coming out of the USA - the last thing we want is any more of their 'healthcare' system popping up over here.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Joe....i've generally got a lot of time for your > comments as they're invariably evenhanded, even if > I dont agree... > > But I genuinely dont understand the above > viewpoint from many remainers. It strikes me as > petulant and spiteful (yes, im sure you can brand > many leavers as petulant too!) How is it either of those things to point out that - as this is not a path I wanted - I should not be expected to suggest a path out of this? I think it's very reasonable to say that as there are other people who wanted this, they are the ones who should find the right course for all of us. Moreover I believe that in the aftermath of the vote, very few Leave supporters wanted to hear anything that Remainers had to say. There are several reasons for that, and while the Remain campaign bears the blame for some of them, there was a certain bellicose sense of invulnerability on the part of the Leave campaign which - publicly at least - was proclaiming that this was going to be plain sailing henceforth. In summary, I stand by my belief that the advocates of this change must be the architects of its success. > > Of course you are free to disagree/criticize all > you like....but as you point out, you're being > dragged along anyway...assuming you cant change > that fact...why not try and have some say in the > manner in which you are being dragged? Partly because, as I said above, my voice (as well as that of many Remain voters) is not welcome in the general public debate. Also because I really don't know what I would say. From where I stand I can only see mutual incompatible positions. The EU, the Hard Brexit group and the People's Vote/Second Ref group all want things that simply cannot be reconciled. Rory Stewart - a reasonable individual if ever there was one - was on QT saying that red lines can be moved, but the DUP is never going to budge, nor is the ERG. The EU says it won't compromise over the Four Freedoms, but in order to satisfy the Hard Brexiters those freedoms cannot be continued, especially Freedom of Movement. The Labour Party only really wants another GE - heaven knows why as it won't win anything, but that's a different debate - and has no actual position on Brexit; those within it's ranks who support a second vote are more vocal than effective. Corbin knows if he comes out for it Labour are done and dusted. > > The analogy I would use is something like > this....lets say I dont want to go to my in-laws > this weekend. But my other half forces me to go. > So my choice then is to make the best of a sh!tty > weekend, or I spend the whole weekend complaining > about how I didnt want to go to my in-laws and > demanding that my other half tidy up/look after > the kids/come up with something to do/drive the > conversation because 'you were the one that made > me come'.... > > Assuming I choose the latter, all that's going to > do is ensure I 'definitely' have a shitty weekend, > and shitty relationship with my other half.... I'm sorry but that's not a great analogy. At the end of the weekend you can go back to your life and try to avoid the next visit. Brexit is not so transitory. I despair, I really do, at the insouciance with which many Leave voters seem to approach this stage of the proceedings. We are ten weeks from leaving the EU as it stands, and as it stands we will crash out. If there's an A50 extension then great, I suppose, but if May can't come up with something fast then it makes no difference materially. We'll be in this same place 'x' amount of time down the line. Personally I think No Deal is what a vocal minority of the Leave campaign wanted all along, and May's incompetence has only served to bolster them as time passes. Promises about how easy it would be to negotiate a deal were made by the Leave campaign. Those promises are not being fulfilled, and it not up to those who voted otherwise to try and help - particularly when it's been made very clear for some time now that we should "shut up and accept it" - language which I think you would agree is only divisive (I concede that cuts both ways, and do not excuse either side in that respect). I also think it's credulous to blame the EU for playing hardball. Credulous and naive. Of course they would stick up fore themselves. I have no idea what's going to happen.