Brexit - was it worth it? (Vol. 4)

[CivicDuties]

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

[crankedup5]

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

[crankedup5]

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

[CivicDuties]

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

[turbobloke]

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

Yes, untold remainer hype is obvious.

It took 7 years from the vote, 2 from leaving the EU, for goods trade to normalise (OBR) compared to 13 years after EEC accession (paper cited earlier in this thread).

Even arch-remainer CMD acknowledged the nonsense of anti-brexit hype as revealed by his Davos confession - Brexit "turned out less badly than we first thought" and Britain leaving the EU is "not a disaster". Far from it, but at least he's getting there. No more tears, Dave.

The only remaining strategy for the trade myopics is to stick to falsely pessimistic economic modelling (errors) even when they've been corrected and apologised for.

[CivicDuties]

turbobloke said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

Yes, untold remainer hype is obvious.

It took 7 years from the vote, 2 from leaving the EU, for goods trade to normalise (OBR) compared to 13 years after EEC accession (paper cited earlier in this thread).

Even arch-remainer CMD acknowledged the nonsense of anti-brexit hype as revealed by his Davos confession - Brexit "turned out less badly than we first thought" and Britain leaving the EU is "not a disaster". Far from it, but at least he's getting there. No more tears, Dave.

We're relying on the word of David Cameron, who is currently engaged in the Conservative Party election campaign, and is desperate to absolve himself of responsibility for the catastrophes of Brexit and Conservative Party governance over the last 8 years? And still the "remainer tears" meme? Add some tears to this

"Turned out less bad than we thought", that's the best you've got? Have another

[Mrr T]

crankedup5 said:

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

Let me repost my reply to turbo.

Mrr T said:

I note again turbo makes claims but provides no links.

Let's help him.

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/comment/brita...

Does not seem to support the claims.

I am sure we welcome all these news trade agreement.
Japan - The EU already had an agreement. I believe Truss boasted the new agreement included extra cheese.
Australia and NZ - Are new agreement but the benefits are tiny and may be negative for UK agriculture.
Norway, Ireland and Liechtenstein - I assume turbo forgot they where part of the SM.
CPTPP - Where we already have country agreements with most. The largest we do not have an agreement is Peru.
US states - You mean the ones that cannot sign trade agreements because that a federal matter.
India - There might be some benefit but it seems they want a lot more work visa.
Switzerland - Again SM.
Israel - EU already had an agreement.
GCC - The EU has agreements with all the member.

If this is the best brexiters can offer the sunny uplands are a long way off.

As I already said if this is the best of brexit we can see why a large majority view it as a bad decision.

[don'tbesilly]

Brexit really starting to hit hard now 7 yrs after the UK left the EU (according to Mortarboard )



https://www.euronews.com/business/2024/06/21/euroz...

[don'tbesilly]

Mrr T said:

crankedup5 said:

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

Let me repost my reply to turbo.

Mrr T said:

I note again turbo makes claims but provides no links.

Let's help him.

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/comment/brita...

Does not seem to support the claims.

I am sure we welcome all these news trade agreement.
Japan - The EU already had an agreement. I believe Truss boasted the new agreement included extra cheese.
Australia and NZ - Are new agreement but the benefits are tiny and may be negative for UK agriculture.
Norway, Ireland and Liechtenstein - I assume turbo forgot they where part of the SM.
CPTPP - Where we already have country agreements with most. The largest we do not have an agreement is Peru.
US states - You mean the ones that cannot sign trade agreements because that a federal matter.
India - There might be some benefit but it seems they want a lot more work visa.
Switzerland - Again SM.
Israel - EU already had an agreement.
GCC - The EU has agreements with all the member.

If this is the best brexiters can offer the sunny uplands are a long way off.

As I already said if this is the best of brexit we can see why a large majority view it as a bad decision.

It was nonsense the first time you posted it, doubling down doesn’t make it any less of a nonsense.

[Mrr T]

don'tbesilly said:

Mrr T said:

crankedup5 said:

turbobloke said:

CivicDuties said:

732NM said:

Mrr T said:

As a proud leave voted do you know anything about the EU?

Any change to the UK relationship with the EU will be decided by the Council.

KS plan for a new deal may have problems. The EU has other problems to deal with, further the one special deal the EU has with Switzerland is difficult to manage.

The obvious plan I think is to rejoin EFTA/EEA. It might even result in a fall in immigration.

The EU are a rules based organisation, until that doesn't suit their issues, then they make it up on the fly. They are unreliable.

UK would be far better served long term to continue down the path of pursuing the expansion of trade links with ROW, especially the future high growth areas. Europe is dying as an area of growth.

There's no reason we couldn't do both. But as it stands today we appear to be doing neither.

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

911 asked me what benefits will brexit bring, Turbo has kindly already addressed this just the other day, 911 must have missed his post - so here you are. Hope you don’t mind Turbo my quoting you.
Other benefits also include U.K. escaping from the debt mutualisation plan waiting onBrussels shelves for the right moment to hit its members with a monster payment demand. Plus, we are not involved, thankfully, with the ‘migrant crisis’ plan of distribution of migrants being imposed onto members by Brussels dictate.

Let me repost my reply to turbo.

Mrr T said:

I note again turbo makes claims but provides no links.

Let's help him.

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/comment/brita...

Does not seem to support the claims.

I am sure we welcome all these news trade agreement.
Japan - The EU already had an agreement. I believe Truss boasted the new agreement included extra cheese.
Australia and NZ - Are new agreement but the benefits are tiny and may be negative for UK agriculture.
Norway, Ireland and Liechtenstein - I assume turbo forgot they where part of the SM.
CPTPP - Where we already have country agreements with most. The largest we do not have an agreement is Peru.
US states - You mean the ones that cannot sign trade agreements because that a federal matter.
India - There might be some benefit but it seems they want a lot more work visa.
Switzerland - Again SM.
Israel - EU already had an agreement.
GCC - The EU has agreements with all the member.

If this is the best brexiters can offer the sunny uplands are a long way off.

As I already said if this is the best of brexit we can see why a large majority view it as a bad decision.

It was nonsense the first time you posted it, doubling down doesn’t make it any less of a nonsense.

If it's nonsense I am sure you can point out the bits that are wrong.

[simon_harris]

CivicDuties said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

Said entirely without irony...

[Mortarboard]

turbobloke said:

Yes, untold remainer hype is obvious.

It took 7 years from the vote, 2 from leaving the EU, for goods trade to normalise (OBR) compared to 13 years after EEC accession (paper cited earlier in this thread).

Even arch-remainer CMD acknowledged the nonsense of anti-brexit hype as revealed by his Davos confession - Brexit "turned out less badly than we first thought" and Britain leaving the EU is "not a disaster". Far from it, but at least he's getting there. No more tears, Dave.

The only remaining strategy for the trade myopics is to stick to falsely pessimistic economic modelling (errors) even when they've been corrected and apologised for.

Customers and border controls still aren't updated. That's how well it's going.....

M.

[CivicDuties]

simon_harris said:

CivicDuties said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

Said entirely without irony...

Well, yeah, because I can see a shed load more damage than the two things cranky named. The breadth and depth of the damage is off the scale. Cranky doesn't want to see it, so he doesn't. On the other hand, I'm aware of the benefits of Brexit, but they are minuscule compared to the damage and downsides, hence my conclusion that Brexit hasn't been worth it. If cranky only accepts those two things he named as damage items, then he's incapable of forming a balanced view and coming to the right conclusion because he's willfully ignoring everything else.

So yeah, no irony, well spotted.

[Who_Goes_Blue]

CivicDuties said:

simon_harris said:

CivicDuties said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

Said entirely without irony...

Well, yeah, because I can see a shed load more damage than the two things cranky named. The breadth and depth of the damage is off the scale. Cranky doesn't want to see it, so he doesn't. On the other hand, I'm aware of the benefits of Brexit, but they are minuscule compared to the damage and downsides, hence my conclusion that Brexit hasn't been worth it. If cranky only accepts those two things he named as damage items, then he's incapable of forming a balanced view and coming to the right conclusion because he's willfully ignoring everything else.

So yeah, no irony, well spotted.

Would you mind providing examples of the damage you are seeing ?

[the-photographer]

turbobloke said:

That's not an accurate picture. As posted in this thread at some point(s):

By 2023, the EU share of UK goods imports and exports had returned to its pre-Brexit level (Resolution Foundation using ONS UK Trade data to 2023). Services trade was more susceptible to the pandemic's influence according to OBR.

RoW goods trade was already above pre-referendum levels by 2021 but has dropped since then (OBR again), not least due to impacts from the war in Ukraine.

In addition to the rollovers, trade deals since brexit have been agreed with Japan / Australia / Norway / Iceland / Liechtenstein / New Zealand / Pacific Rim (CPTPP). In addition, deals have been agreed with eight USA states including Texas, the GDPs of several of these states are equivalent to nation level GDPs and the total amounts to 25% of USA GDP.. Deals are being negotiated with India, Switzerland, Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council.

Australia, New Zealand and Japan are new deals, the rest are roll overs.

USA individual states, not worth the paper they are written on, US trading arrangements being under federal control

Canada, no deal, going backwards

A future India deal, lets see after the election

[CivicDuties]

Who_Goes_Blue said:

CivicDuties said:

simon_harris said:

CivicDuties said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

Said entirely without irony...

Well, yeah, because I can see a shed load more damage than the two things cranky named. The breadth and depth of the damage is off the scale. Cranky doesn't want to see it, so he doesn't. On the other hand, I'm aware of the benefits of Brexit, but they are minuscule compared to the damage and downsides, hence my conclusion that Brexit hasn't been worth it. If cranky only accepts those two things he named as damage items, then he's incapable of forming a balanced view and coming to the right conclusion because he's willfully ignoring everything else.

So yeah, no irony, well spotted.

Would you mind providing examples of the damage you are seeing ?

You can download an initial list of the first 1,000 damaging disbenefits here, at your leisure:

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/regular-features/th...

[andymadmak]

CivicDuties said:

You can download an initial list of the first 1,000 damaging disbenefits here, at your leisure:

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/regular-features/th...

A three year old article, already posted on here several times, chunks of which have been debunked numerous times. Yeah, that's credible.

[mike9009]

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

For me, this is the crux. Was it really worth the bother for such little change (negative or positive).

[crankedup5]

CivicDuties said:

crankedup5 said:

CivicDuties said:

turbobloke said:

Murph7355 said:

That I am not a believer in politicians just underscored me wanting rid of the additional unnecessary layer. We should always have the fewest possible number of politicians, placed as close to the electorate they serve as possible IMO. The EU is the opposite of that now.

And will be into the future.

Spot on.

No, it isn't. My local MEP was a lady called Catherine Bearder, who was very close to her electorate. Couldn't have been much closer really, did a better job than a lot of MPs in the House of Commons on that score. Just because you were never actually looking at our MEPs and what they did (because you had pre-conceived beliefs that they were useless gravy train riding deadweights), doesn't mean they weren't there and working for us.

You really need to get over your received beliefs and persistent repetition of false assertions which exist simply to justify your narratives and your 2016 referendum votes, in the face of untold damage you've done to this country.

Untold damage? you mean the short term hiccup in trading difficulties and some minor additional red tape for travellers.

None so blind as those who won't see.

I mention two of the most high lit issues used by remainers in these threads. Constant moans about trade and travel. These two issues are both being reviewed and betterment sought. As I said, brexit is an ongoing project.

[CivicDuties]

andymadmak said:

CivicDuties said:

You can download an initial list of the first 1,000 damaging disbenefits here, at your leisure:

https://yorkshirebylines.co.uk/regular-features/th...

A three year old article, already posted on here several times, chunks of which have been debunked numerous times. Yeah, that's credible.

Once again, none as blind as those who won't see.

The problem is, the damage is so widespread, and infects so many aspects of life, from the economy, to travel, to lost rights, to education, to opportunities for young people and retirees, to diplomatic fallout and reputational damage, to national security, to policing, and beyond, there isn't a nice little soundbite article I can provide for you. Take off the willful blinkers, drop the denialism and simplistic 'well it's not as bad as it could have been' and 'it's only some trade blips and a bit of travel disruption', or whatever desperately thin gruel it was the cranky posted up. It's all out there, and it's breathtaking. It's no good asking me to spoon feed you. The penny isn't going to drop here, where your heels are dug in so deep you can probably see Melbourne.