No Fault Evictions

[woodieallen]

I see a lot of posts about the negative aspects of Brexit. This post on X is an interesting read from the opposite point of view:
FIFTY BREXIT BENEFITS - MEGATHREAD (his capitals, I'm not shouting).

Unfortunately you have to be a Musk Rat to view this.

 

[Jacob]

I see a lot of posts about the negative aspects of Brexit. This post on X is an interesting read from the opposite point of view:
FIFTY BREXIT BENEFITS - MEGATHREAD (his capitals, I'm not shouting).

Nobody believes anything seen on Twitter anymore since it was taken over by E Musk - a high profile mega-rich hard-right propagandist.
In any case to work through 50 dubious arguments would take some time so I'm not even going to start.
Which one would you say was most convincing? Or which 5 max?

 

[Croolis]

Doesn't seem to matter what forum I join, wander into the off topic bit and it's always just about a bunch of middle aged gammons arguing about Brexit .

 

[Chris152]

Doesn't seem to matter what forum I join, wander into the off topic bit and it's always just about a bunch of middle aged gammons arguing about Brexit .

Aye, welcome aboard.

 

[mudman]

Nobody believes anything seen on Twitter anymore since it was taken over by E Musk - a high profile mega-rich hard-right propagandist.

I think you'll find it's the opposite, especially with the introduction of community notes that enables the addition of corrections by people where falsehoods are being claimed.

In any case to work through 50 dubious arguments would take some time so I'm not even going to start.
Which one would you say was most convincing? Or which 5 max?

How very typical of you. So sure in the veracity of your position and arguments that you will refuse to even read any counter arguments in case they turn out to be even slightly true.

If you took the time to have a look at that thread, you may also see where they are, as the poster says, ' fully evidenced and demonstrably true.'

Me, I'm not saying if I'm in favour of or against Brexit as I don't get drawn into such arguments, I just provided the link as a counter to the constant claims of a Brexit disaster. Just have a read, you claim to be well-read, surely you read a bit more widely than the politics columns in The Guardian.

By the way, he added an additional 10 items since I first saw it so it's up to 60 now.

 

[Jacob]

I think you'll find it's the opposite, especially with the introduction of community notes that enables the addition of corrections by people where falsehoods are being claimed.



How very typical of you. So sure in the veracity of your position and arguments that you will refuse to even read any counter arguments in case they turn out to be even slightly true.

If you took the time to have a look at that thread, you may also see where they are, as the poster says, ' fully evidenced and demonstrably true.'

Me, I'm not saying if I'm in favour of or against Brexit as I don't get drawn into such arguments, I just provided the link as a counter to the constant claims of a Brexit disaster. Just have a read, you claim to be well-read, surely you read a bit more widely than the politics columns in The Guardian.

By the way, he added an additional 10 items since I first saw it so it's up to 60 now.

Which 5 claims would you say were the most convincing?
I looked at the first one - it doesn't seem to be an argument for brexit at all. Might do at first glance but the whole issue is more complicated and interesting than that. That the better off nations pay more is part of the whole concept.
2019: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48256318

 

[niemeyjt]

Now waiting for our resident serfs to line up with unconvincing arguments against taking money from their poor masters!

Meanwhile, away from the socialist utopia and back in the real world:

There will eventually be no millionaires to tax. A lesson Francois Hollande learned in France. Sadly, Ms Reeves seems too stupid to learn from history - and those that fail to learn from history are bound to repeat it.

The issue then becomes how the next government in 2030 tries to get them back - or if they have been driven away for ever.

 

[mudman]

Which 5 claims would you say were the most convincing?

Why the **** should I? I make no claims either way. I found it interesting purely from the juxtaposition of it with yours and other's opinions. It shows that you might actually be wrong, there might have been some benefits. Go on, you have a look and find your top 5 wrong 'uns.

 

[Jacob]

Why the pineapple should I? I make no claims either way. I found it interesting purely from the juxtaposition of it with yours and other's opinions. It shows that you might actually be wrong, there might have been some benefits. Go on, you have a look and find your top 5 wrong 'uns.

See above.
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/61262/html/

 

[Jacob]

Why the pineapple should I?

Because you are in a **** ing discussion and trying to make a point.
n.b. you haven't referenced any of the points I made earlier.

I make no claims either way.

Yes you do, see your next sentence underlined

I found it interesting purely from the juxtaposition of it with yours and other's opinions. It shows that you might actually be wrong,

there might have been some benefits.

No doubt. But it's the totality which counts and the consensus from all quarters seems to be no meaningful benefits.

 

[mudman]

See above.
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/61262/html/

So you are using a document written before the Brexit referendum to support your position
Blimey, you couldn't make it up.

 

[Jacob]

So you are using a document written before the Brexit referendum to support your position
Blimey, you couldn't make it up.

The arguments still hold.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64450882

 

[mudman]

Which 5 claims would you say were the most convincing?
I looked at the first one - it doesn't seem to be an argument for brexit at all. Might do at first glance but the whole issue is more complicated and interesting than that. That the better off nations pay more is part of the whole concept.
2019: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48256318

I think the concept that you are missing is that Britain no longer pays that. It was a lot of money. Might have been worth every penny to be a member of the club, it might not have been. If it's more complex than that, try explaining it, although I won't hold my breath waiting.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

So give them a chance. They've only been in power for three months and parliament was in recess for most of that.

We have absolutely no choice but to give them a chance given their overwhelming parliamentary majority. In five years time we can judge whether the progress made justifies another five.

However in the first three months they have exhibited many of the poor behaviours of their predecessors - I am rapidly forming the conclusion they are not the "new broom sweeping clean", but has much in common with Triggers (only Fools and Horses) - a new handle on an old head!!

 

[Jacob]

I think the concept that you are missing is that Britain no longer pays that.

Yes got that. The concept you are missing is that it was an imaginative and constructive project with a future. Well worth paying for. EU and UK now both worse off.

It was a lot of money. Might have been worth every penny to be a member of the club, it might not have been. If it's more complex than that, try explaining it, although I won't hold my breath waiting.

You could find out for yourself if you could be bothered. Ignorance is no excuse, what with google etc.

 

[paulrbarnard]

Doesn't seem to matter what forum I join, wander into the off topic bit and it's always just about a bunch of middle aged gammons arguing about Brexit .

We do get some good excursions in to sharpening.

 

[John Brown]

I am complimented by the middle aged description, not so much by the gammon.

Weird, the forum filters allowed your plural pig meat term, but altered my singular.

All fairly pointless, as you can post screenshots bristling with offensive terms.

 

[Cooper]

The Guardian...again. So blatant with the bias journalism, Jacob.

Brexit, prior to the pandemic, was unfortunate in that it diverted the governments away from the issues, the markets closed down, travel was stopped. Not a good moment for sorting out the Brexit deals etc., andit was always public knowledge that Brexit would take several years to sort out; the UK having financial commitments to the EU to settle and allowing the EU to get over its strop that anyone would want to leave the EU which put us at the start of the pandemic.

The new Covid variants appear to be weaker than those in 2019/20 and we are seeing the light of recovery as far as the recession is concerned, so we may get some stabilty in the next 10 years and we will be able to see the gains from the end of our financial obligations and the growth of trade, both with the EU and the rest of the world. The future, to me, looks better than it would have done if we'd have stayed in the floundering EU.

If you can't trust the Grauniad, the BBC which seems to take its lead from The Mail this morning has this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd988p00z1no

I just think leaving such an influential group as the EU is bonkers. Yesterday I used a tub of ready mixed mortar, printed on the side were details of its compliance with CE regs and next to it an identical list of compliance with the UK’s.
And lots of people in the non English parts of the UK want to leave the UK unless we are part of Europe. Then we'd really be left alone, a lot of shouty old men, who would pay our pensions?
If you saw across the Atlantic that Pennsylvania had decided 52% to 48% to leave the USA because of too many immigrants crossing from Mexico, I think you would consider them totally bonkers. Denying residents their dream to retire to Florida or young people the opportunity to try their luck in California. Preventing their sons and daughters bringing their partners home to live near their parents. Stopping expanding businesses trading with their nearest markets. And for what benefit? new trade deals with economies on the other side of the world.
But this is only the opinion of a shouty old man

 

[woodieallen]

Alf put's it far more succinctly

 

[AJB Temple]

And lots of people in the non English parts of the UK want to leave the UK unless we are part of Europe. Then we'd really be left alone, a lot of shouty old men, who would pay our pensions?

But this is only the opinion of a shouty old man

I've just come back from a boat delivery to Wales, and spent a few days driving around visiting gardens with my in-laws. Parts of Wales appear impoverished. They were quite reliant on EU subsidies and are now very reliant on English subsidies. Wales alone would not get close to meeting the EU membership criteria and separation from England would benefit the English a great deal financially. Many Welsh appear to be anti-English but it is hard to understand the logic.

Scotland has a different culture but also is economically dependent on England. This may not have been the case in the days when extracting oil was not regarded as a heinous crime against humanity and the environment. Independence now would also not meet EU membership criteria and would be economic suicide for Scotland and financially beneficial to the English.

Country borders are not "real" anyway: they are a human construction largely through war, power accumulation and greed. Nature recognises no border.