In , out, shake it all about

[*Bob*]

I think it's fished, isn't it?

When we regain control of our steel-fishing waters, we can rebuild the industry and make Britain great again.

[Seabag]

Hurrah, Boris Island U.K Ltd ? is a near reality

Let's grow some coal mountains, in the Thames Estuary

[TheArtfulDogger]

Of course, the most convincing argument I have heard so far for getting out of that if we do, then we will never ever have to compete in or host the Eurovision Song Contest ever again.

That alone would be a result 😅

[Louisa]

You're all lunatics! Sheepishly following the Westminster elite into the economic wilderness of the EU, where unlike top dogs Germany and France, who can freely stroll the exercise yard with all the other 'prisoners', we will be chained and thrown into a padded isolation cell and left to rot, other than at meal times when we are allowed to the table, as long as we don't speak (or get shouted down by the rest if we do).

Louisa.

[Jeremy]

Corbyn seems to think re-opening the coal mines is viable. So must be true.

[Louisa]

And ditto what foxy said. This union will collapse, the Euro will fragment into a two tier currency, and the refugee crisis will worsen. By leaving, we avoid all of this mess. And believe me, Germany, France and all the other big players will come flooding towards us with investment once the collapse starts happening.

Louisa.

[Loz]

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You're all lunatics! Sheepishly following the Westminster elite into the economic wilderness of

> the EU, where unlike top dogs Germany and France, who can freely stroll the exercise yard with all

> the other 'prisoners', we will be chained and thrown into a padded isolation cell and left to

> rot, other than at meal times when we are allowed to the table, as long as we don't speak (or get

> shouted down by the rest if we do).

I'm glad to see that you've not had to resort to irrational, wildly-overemotional arguments, Louisa. :))

[DulwichFox]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Louisa Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > You're all lunatics! Sheepishly following the

> Westminster elite into the economic wilderness of

> > the EU, where unlike top dogs Germany and

> France, who can freely stroll the exercise yard

> with all

> > the other 'prisoners', we will be chained and

> thrown into a padded isolation cell and left to

> > rot, other than at meal times when we are

> allowed to the table, as long as we don't speak

> (or get

> > shouted down by the rest if we do).

>

> I'm glad to see that you've not had to resort to

> irrational, wildly-overemotional arguments,

> Louisa. :))

There needs to be passion.. We have given this 40 years.. It's time to put it to bed...

Foxy..

[Otta]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In what way is Boris "very clever"? I'm sure he

> exaggerates elements of his personality to

> influence people, but that doesn't make him some

> sort of evil genius. It just makes him a

> politician.

I wasn't suggesting he was Blofeld or anything. But I see so many people saying he's a total clown what an idiot, and I think those people are fooling themselves.

[Otta]

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So the 'debate' so far has run along expected

> lines;

>

> A. "Look at the wonderful people on our side and

> the nasty stupid ones on yours! THAT'S why you

> should vote our way!"

>

> B. "Your arguments are ridiculous, you are an

> idiot, you are wrong! Everyone who thinks your way

> is the same."

>

> C (hardly to be seen) I think 'x' but understand

> why you think 'y'. I see what you say and rather

> than take page after mind numbingly dull page

> trying to shoot you down and show why I am best I

> will just put my own argument/pov. My reasons for

> my choice (atm) are...

Not really surprising is it? But you are right, and I a going to try hard not to look at this thread for the next 4 months, because I know I'll learn nothing, and I know I'll see some people try talking with the confidence of people who can read the future, when in actual fact they're as clueless as the rest of us.

[Louisa]

At the end of this lengthy and tiresome four month build up to, and the Election Day itself, we know two things for absolute certain.

1) we might stay in

2) we might leave

Beyond that, Otta is of course correct. All the bar-stall EDF political pundits, know bugger all about anything.

Louisa.

[Earl Aelfheah]

People have an opinion. What's your point, that no one can know the future? Well sure.

[Louisa]

Opinions and facts cannot be conflated. It's fine to state why you think we should stay/leave, but coming out with unfounded wild assumptions about the future of our country, aren't doing anyone any good. It's confusing for people. And that goes for both sides of the argument. I am happy to say I want us to leave, and I don't know what the future may hold as a result, but my opinion is, it won't be any worse than the status quo.

Louisa.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Brussels. Not just for Christmas.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I think London should vote for independence from the rest of the UK

[maxxi]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think London should vote for independence from

> the rest of the UK

Then the South can finally secede from those Islington toss pots

[Earl Aelfheah]

People's republic of Dulwich perhaps?

[maxxi]

Persons republic I think - referred to generally as 'One's Republic'?

[Blah Blah]

This is a recent article about TTIP, but it gives an insight into trade deals, especially with the USA.

http://www.thecanary.co/2016/01/27/conservatives-block-access-secret-nhs-privatisation-documents/

Also the UK has 50 different trade deals with the EU, every single one of which would have to be renegotiated if we left the EU but still wanted to trade.

[jacks09]

"And ditto what foxy said. This union will collapse, the Euro will fragment into a two tier currency, and the refugee crisis will worsen. By leaving, we avoid all of this mess. And believe me, Germany, France and all the other big players will come flooding towards us with investment once the collapse starts happening.

Louisa."

and then.....

"Opinions and facts cannot be conflated. It's fine to state why you think we should stay/leave, but coming out with unfounded wild assumptions about the future of our country, aren't doing anyone any good. It's confusing for people. And that goes for both sides of the argument. I am happy to say I want us to leave, and I don't know what the future may hold as a result, but my opinion is, it won't be any worse than the status quo.

Louisa."

I mean.......just.......there were little over 2 hours between these statements......uh.....

[Blah Blah]

I know. That's why I gave up debating with her. A total contradiction.

[Louisa]

Nothing contradictory in my argument. I will be voting no for the reasons I stated previously, but I also take on board what others have said about allowing arguments to fall into chaos. In your argument Blah, you don't just try and make the point, you question a persons ability to make a sound decision, if it doesn't fall in line with yours. That's patronising.

Presenting me and others with one sided articles to back up your claims isn't going to win a sceptic such as myself over easily. I've not done that, and I've tried my best not to be overly emotive.

Louisa.

[Blah Blah]

If you actually read those documents, they are formed by knowledgeable economists based on available data. You haven't challenged a single point in any of them. Whereas the one link you posted, I did read and challenge. You do contradict yourself and call foul when called out on it. It's not my fault that you fail to research your points properly. It's just too easy to find the holes. That's what happens when you engage in debate but aren't really up to it. And if you find that patronising...tough. Your lack of interest in the detail and economics of it all is down to you.

[Louisa]

Blah not at all. And it isn't down to you whether I or anyone else should feel patronised by your attempt at 'winning us over' to your side of the argument, is it? If you are attempting to make a point and get people to vote in line with your pro-argument, surely you should think to yourself "how is this coming across? Am I being informative? What can I do to get them on side?", but no unfortunantely you've taken a different path which feels like being shouted at by a school teacher. That won't win me over I'm afraid.

You need to realise that your 'IN' argument falls in line with the political and urban intelligentsia line, and therefore the last thing you should be doing in support of staying in is to wag your finger at the opposing camp, who are just lay people who see the EU as bureaucractic. You'll only encourage the anti establishment movement, just as happened in Scotland.

Louisa.

[Blah Blah]

Louisa, from someone who thinks only 200,000 jobs rely on those 200bn of annual exports I'll pass. Whatever my argument is, it is better informed than yours by a mile. Whether people agree with my line is neither here nor there. In debating terms though, I prefer to have a balanced view based on fact, not soundbites swallowed hook, line and sinker from the UKIP Brexit bunch. I am assuming that's where you get your ideas as you certainly haven't got them from any kind of detailed research.

I'll give you just one example. The Working Time Driective was set up to protect employees from being made to work long hours. The Tories were fiercely opposed to it, the same Tories that think zero hour contracts are acceptable. You really think that if we lose the pretection of a piece of regulation like that, that this government will still apply the legislation as 'a good thing' in principle?

I've shown that trading with europe will still cost us, that it will cost British business. Renegotiating 50 trade deals with Europe will take years. That we already trade with the rest of the world, like China, India, the USA, Africa, Argentina. That non EU refugeess and how they travel has nothing to do with the EU per se. That five million brits live and work in the EU. Millions of Bulgarians and Rumanians did not head to Britain when they were allowed free movement finally - something that is claimed every time a country joins the EU these days. That we have a right wing government that is not interested in workers rights, unions or the poor (all groups the EU does protect). All of those things are hard to disagree with because they reflect what is.

And in spite of these robust replies to your claims you haven't challenged a single one. Why is that Louisa? It's because you can never acknowledge you post stuff that is clearly untrue.

I'm still waiting for you to provide the economic data that backs your claim that only 200,000 jobs rely on businesses trading with the EU. You say stuff, get called out, and then conveniently ignore the response, going on the attack instead by labelling someone as patronising. And that is why you are impossible to have any kind of debate with.