Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[Paul the Wolf]

They are in relation to some people in African countries. But they don't live there so this is not relevant.

It is relevant in that they can fall a lot further, the Africans can't turn to their government for help but my point is that no-one in the UK should ever be in that situation, and if they are it is a failure of the government, how do these people then blame the EU for the government's failure , because the government have lied to them yet again and people believe them the same as other Brexit voters, the majority of which were not in this poverty -stricken situation

 

[Javi]

You'll have to take it from me that in almost 20 years of working in front line homeless services a day barely passed when we did not have a service user who was 1) Without a home and not eligible for further housing assiatnce from the state 2) Had never worked and was not capable of working 3) Was sanctioned and/or had failed to meet conditions of benefits payments and was therefore in receipt of no benefit. Without the assistance and advocacy that can be provided as part of engagement with services to challenge scenarios such as this it is a reality that many people exist in Britain under those exact conditions. There is a world out there populated by those who have truly been marginalised to the extreme edges of society that is difficult to comprehend - I know of a community of people who have taken to local woods and live in trenches surviving only on what they can scavenge for example.

That sounds terrible. I always thought that in the whole of Western Europe a social net of 'last resort' exists where you get provided with all the things you need to survive (it exists where I'm living, we call it the 'subsistence minimum') with no questions asked other than «do you have no assets?» How you can even lose eligibility to housing assistance is beyond me. This is workfare gone horribly wrong.

 

[endless_wheelies]

Someone should ask if they'd be willing to give up their pensions.

Weirdly Theresa May's manifesto was geared towards making older people pay their share and all the young voters shot it down.

 

[Barca84]

That sounds terrible. I always thought that in the whole of Western Europe a social net of 'last resort' exists where you get provided with all the things you need to survive (it exists where I'm living, we call it the 'subsistence minimum') with no questions asked other than «do you have no assets?» How you can even lose eligibility to housing assistance is beyond me. This is workfare gone horribly wrong.

I'm afraid that in this country you can genuinely be left with nothing and people are. There are safety nets but people fall through them and often it's the most vulnerable who do.

 

[Barca84]

It is relevant in that they can fall a lot further, the Africans can't turn to their government for help but my point is that no-one in the UK should ever be in that situation, and if they are it is a failure of the government, how do these people then blame the EU for the government's failure , because the government have lied to them yet again and people believe them the same as other Brexit voters, the majority of which were not in this poverty -stricken situation

No there are some people in this country who can't fall much further. That's my point.

I would say that many people simply see a system that does not appear to provide for them economically and never has done. They also perceive this system as providing for others. When you live in the old pit villages and towns where there has been no work for 4 or 5 decades, and no hope of any in the future, and every promise of a better future for the past 40 or 50 years has proven to be a false one then voting for change carries little risk. You should see some of the towns around here - they look post apocalyptic. And they are in a way. They've been abandoned after their use as the engine rooms of the industrial revolution came to an end. People die on average 7 years younger then others living just 200 miles away in the same country.

 

[MadMike]

Weirdly Theresa May's manifesto was geared towards making older people pay their share and all the young voters shot it down.

How exactly did that happen, care to elaborate please? How did the young people shoot it down, because they voted for Corbyn? Cause that's not the same.

 

[711]

Someone should ask if they'd be willing to give up their pensions.

It's infuriating all those lazy old bastards living it up on £122 a week and then demanding the right to vote as well ain't it?

 

[endless_wheelies]

How exactly did that happen, care to elaborate please? How did the young people shoot it down, because they voted for Corbyn? Cause that's not the same.

Theresa May tried to ditch the pensions triple lock, cut winter fuel payments and cut social care but the young hippies of the country had a whinge about it and voted for Jeremy Corbyn.

Going to be fun having it come out of all of our taxes instead, or watch the country go into even more ludicrous debt.

 

[MadMike]

Theresa May tried to ditch the pensions triple lock, cut winter fuel payments and cut social care but the young hippies of the country had a whinge about it and voted for Jeremy Corbyn.

Going to be fun having it come out of all of our taxes instead, or watch the country go into even more ludicrous debt.

I'm sorry but I don't agree in the slightest.

The young voted for Corbyn for a number of reasons. The young were against Brexit and Theresa is not only pushing for one but for a hard one. Corbyn promised (quite ridiculously imo) to cut the student debt. Also Theresa had some disastrous stuff in her original manifesto that made her even more unpopular, like repealing the fox hunting ban etc. That's just scratching the surface.

My point being the young rejected Theresa. Not that particular policy. You don't get to pick and choose policies but the whole package. Rightly or wrongly the young chose Corbyn.

Finally, from manifestos to realisation there is a huge, huge bridge to cross. Politicians of all colours fail to deliver on the majority of their pre election promises. The majority of Tory votes come from pensioners, so I personally believe Theresa's claims about ending the pension triple lock as much as I believed Corbyn's claims about nationalising everything and writing off student debt while spending 100s of billions in infrastructure. Which is not a lot.

 

[endless_wheelies]

I'm sorry but I don't agree in the slightest.

The young voted for Corbyn for a number of reasons. The young were against Brexit and Theresa is not only pushing for one but for a hard one. Corbyn promised (quite ridiculously imo) to cut the student debt. Also Theresa had some disastrous stuff in her original manifesto that made her even more unpopular, like repealing the fox hunting ban etc. That's just scratching the surface.

My point being the young rejected Theresa. Not that particular policy. You don't get to pick and choose policies but the whole package. Rightly or wrongly the young chose Corbyn.

Finally, from manifestos to realisation there is a huge, huge bridge to cross. Politicians of all colours fail to deliver on the majority of their pre election promises. The majority of Tory votes come from pensioners, so I personally believe Theresa's claims about ending the pension triple lock as much as I believed Corbyn's claims about nationalising everything and writing off student debt while spending 100s of billions in infrastructure. Which is not a lot.

My point is that at least she was somewhat on their side in trying to somehow fund our aging population through the pockets of the aging themselves, Jeremy Corbyn on the other hand was vociferously against increasing the burden on them in any way whatsoever.

The idea that Corbyn would pursue a soft Brexit was pure fantasy, he's never once intimated that that is something he would pursue, the same with writing off existing student debt.

 

[C3Pique]

May stated that a vote for her was a mandate for Brexit. Hence many anti brexit people would have voted for their most likely non-Tory candidate to win their local seat, in most cases Labour.

Corbyn didn't have a strong stance on Brexit before the GE, so people weren't necessarily voting for him, but against May.

 

[Silva]

It's infuriating all those lazy old bastards living it up on £122 a week and then demanding the right to vote as well ain't it?

It's just a more appropriate question. If they're okay with others losing their income, would they be happy with losing theirs?

 

[Stanley Road]

No there are some people in this country who can't fall much further. That's my point.

I would say that many people simply see a system that does not appear to provide for them economically and never has done. They also perceive this system as providing for others. When you live in the old pit villages and towns where there has been no work for 4 or 5 decades, and no hope of any in the future, and every promise of a better future for the past 40 or 50 years has proven to be a false one then voting for change carries little risk. You should see some of the towns around here - they look post apocalyptic. And they are in a way. They've been abandoned after their use as the engine rooms of the industrial revolution came to an end. People die on average 7 years younger then others living just 200 miles away in the same country.

I get the feeling that some people would prefer to ignore what you just described. I agree with almost everything you post on this subject and will never understand why some people just don't get it.

 

[Stanley Road]

My point is that at least she was somewhat on their side in trying to somehow fund our aging population through the pockets of the aging themselves

Anything to avoid paying more right? UK is not the only place with an ageing population, NL is exactly the same. We have to pay more for the poor elderly folk and that's how it should be, you'll agree when you are old.

 

[Stanley Road]

Long but excellent read from the Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/aug/04/how-britain-fell-out-of-love-with-the-free-market

 

[rcoobc]

Long but excellent read from the Guardian

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/aug/04/how-britain-fell-out-of-love-with-the-free-market

Jesus, that was a long read. hahaha

I don't believe Brexit has much directly to do with the free market really. It's not one of the top reasons to vote leave from the leave voters (Sovereignty 1, Immigration 2, worry about an expanded EU 3.) Many prominent orchestrators of the EU Referendum, people like Dan Hannan complain the EU is too protectionist and want more open free market.

The UK isn't America. You won't find many people here complaining that their jobs have gone to Eastern Europe, Mexico or China. You will find "some" people who complain yes; the highly publicised Tata Steel, Port Talbot closure is arguably a direct result from the price of steel from China, but it's not something people talk about everyday. The huge crash in 2008 that cost so many people their jobs.. those service jobs didn't go to Eastern Europe or Asia, they just went. In fact I'd say a lot less people talk about free markets today than they did in the 70s and 80s.

So the worry is about Immigration - yes. Free markets - no.

The article focuses on the different views of capitalism across the government and across MPs, which is quite right given that the average Brit doesn't tend to have an opinion on the subject.

With his modest communication skills, Miliband faced a huge task in advocating a different kind of economy. The few reforms he proposed were either too abstract and technical-sounding (“predistribution”, or creating a capitalism that requires less redistribution of income by government), or too short-term (a temporary price cap on energy bills) to form a coherent picture.

Like Blue Labour and the Red Tories, he wanted to remove the worst excesses of the free market while leaving the rest of it intact. The ambivalence of the Labour mainstream towards capitalism, an ambivalence as old as the party itself, “played out inside him,” says Cruddas. Last month, Miliband told the Guardian with a characteristically opaque mix of self-confidence and self-criticism: “I think what Jeremy [Corbyn’s success] teaches me is that when I had instincts that we needed to break with the past, and we needed more radicalism, I was right.”

In 2015, whatever Miliband’s true intentions, the many remaining neoliberals in the Labour hierarchy, such as then shadow chancellor Ed Balls, had other economic priorities. So, increasingly, did Glasman, who became controversially preoccupied by the idea that a reformed British capitalism would involve drastically less immigration. At that year’s general election, after an internal struggle that Cruddas and Miliband lost, Labour presented a manifesto that emphasised cutting the national deficit in language little different from that used by the Tories. The manifesto only criticised the deregulated capitalism that had effectively created that deficit in the first place in coded terms: “We will build an economy that works for working people,” it promised blandly. Even though more and more politicians and commentators agreed that free-market Britain was working less and less well, the anti-capitalist moment seemed to have gone.

Even economic thinkers close to McDonnell wonder if a Corbyn government could effect such a transformation. Paul Mason, author of Postcapitalism, says: “They have a big task with a small team. We face problems – climate change, information technology destroying jobs, a market economy that in many sectors is not capable any more of generating value – that were not faced by Keynes,” the last economist to shift British capitalism to the left, more than 70 years ago.

Mazzucato is probably McDonnell’s favourite contemporary economist. In her much-cited 2013 book The Entrepreneurial State, she argued convincingly – as the Labour manifesto did – that through state-funded research and other investment, government acts as an essential accelerator of capitalism rather than a drag on it, as free-marketeers usually claim. Last year, she gave the first lecture in an ongoing series of Labour events intended by McDonnell to set out a “New Economics”. According to the website LabourList, “McDonnell sat [in] rapt attention throughout.”

In a hot meeting room at University College London, where she is director of a new institute for innovation, the Italian-American Mazzucato told me that the 2017 Labour manifesto was “a turning point” in British economic policy, “full of good stuff, a new energy”. She advises McDonnell. Yet she also advises the Conservative business secretary, Greg Clark, and the SNP. She thinks Labour could do better: “I say to them, ‘You sound defensive. You sound like you know what’s wrong with the economy, rather than what could happen.’” She says Labour needs to explain its economic policies more compellingly: “When you do bold things, if you don’t have the language to describe them, you’re going to be in trouble.”

The Conservative reformers of British capitalism have the opposite problem. So far, their rhetoric dwarfs their solutions. “Their promises to put workers on company boards, to stop high executive pay, haven’t really gone anywhere,” says Tim Bale, a leading historian of the party. Many observers, on both the left and the right, interpreted the 2017 Tory manifesto’s anti-market talk as solely a ploy to attract Labour voters – a ploy that failed so badly that it led to the resignation of one of its devisers, Theresa May’s joint chief of staff Nick Timothy.

Blond insists that many senior Tories besides Timothy oppose neoliberalism. Before Thatcher, there was a recurring Conservative impulse to soften capitalism during hard times – from the future prime minister Harold Macmillan’s influential 1938 book The Middle Way to Edward Heath’s centrist government in the 70s. But that impulse has weakened. “Most Tory MPs are Thatcher’s children,” says Bale. “Most Tory thinktanks are still in a free-market phase.” So is the Tory press: “I could more easily imagine an asteroid hitting the earth,” says Mason, “than the Sun and the Mail coming out for state intervention.”

I think these questions mirror the debate going on elsewhere, with no real answers.

Have Britain fallen out of love with the free market? Who knows.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

No there are some people in this country who can't fall much further. That's my point.

I would say that many people simply see a system that does not appear to provide for them economically and never has done. They also perceive this system as providing for others. When you live in the old pit villages and towns where there has been no work for 4 or 5 decades, and no hope of any in the future, and every promise of a better future for the past 40 or 50 years has proven to be a false one then voting for change carries little risk. You should see some of the towns around here - they look post apocalyptic. And they are in a way. They've been abandoned after their use as the engine rooms of the industrial revolution came to an end. People die on average 7 years younger then others living just 200 miles away in the same country.

Before I moved to France I lived not far from the area you're talking about, in Lincolnshire, and regularly went through Nottingham and surrounding districts. Then go and visit some African towns and villages or many other places in the world and see how far you can really fall, the government have a responsibility to these people and it is their fault that people are in those situations.
We are again back to ignorance, I know these people were desperate but if they were informed they would know it's only going to make it worse , not better and it will get worse for them, even if they think it can't.
But the vast majority of the 17million who voted for Brexit were not poor, what is their excuse.

 

[endless_wheelies]

Anything to avoid paying more right? UK is not the only place with an ageing population, NL is exactly the same. We have to pay more for the poor elderly folk and that's how it should be, you'll agree when you are old.

Actually it was the rich elderly she was targeting.

 

[711]

Actually it was the rich elderly she was targeting.

She targeted both. The 'rich' in terms of means testing free tv licences and perks, but all in terms of removing the triple lock on state pensions, which would potentially of hurt the poorest pensioners the most in terms of percentage of total income.

I probably agree with it in terms of austerity, with other benefits frozen and public sector pay capped well below inflation, but each to their own.

 

[Stanley Road]

I don't believe Brexit has much directly to do with the free market really. It's not one of the top reasons to vote leave from the leave voters (Sovereignty 1, Immigration 2, worry about an expanded EU 3.) Many prominent orchestrators of the EU Referendum, people like Dan Hannan complain the EU is too protectionist and want more open free market.

The UK isn't America. You won't find many people here complaining that their jobs have gone to Eastern Europe, Mexico or China. You will find "some" people who complain yes; the highly publicised Tata Steel, Port Talbot closure is arguably a direct result from the price of steel from China, but it's not something people talk about everyday. The huge crash in 2008 that cost so many people their jobs.. those service jobs didn't go to Eastern Europe or Asia, they just went. In fact I'd say a lot less people talk about free markets today than they did in the 70s and 80s.

So the worry is about Immigration - yes. Free markets - no.

The article focuses on the different views of capitalism across the government and across MPs, which is quite right given that the average Brit doesn't tend to have an opinion on the subject.

The article doesn't directly link to Brexit but does explain well why people are fecked off with neo liberalist politicscs and are sick of the few making a killing why the average joe rarely feel the good times. Free markets are not the be all and end all. Average people don't feel the good times and have to pay for the bad times.

I have been made redundant in recent years with my job going to india, all my other colleagues had their jobs moved to Hungary so it is a concern. We had 5 developers quit last Friday cos the code they were getting back from india was crap and they flagged it up, no-one listened. so from 20 developers we now have gone down to 7 for a product that the company is investing 90% of its marketing budget on. This is classic race to the bottom stuff. Scared of more resignations the company has promised not to replace those developers with people from India.

Our best selling product is now made in Hungary and the quality of service from there is shocking. Hungary is eastern Europe by the way so are people nervy about their jobs going? Yes they are. Do they talk about it often? Yes they do.

Poland is one of the few places in Europe that has seen a massive decline in poverty, why's that do you think? Either all the poor people are in London or companies are using it for cheap labour.

Lets see how Brexit looks once the dust settles.

 

[rcoobc]

The article doesn't directly link to Brexit but does explain well why people are fecked off with neo liberalist politicscs and are sick of the few making a killing why the average joe rarely feel the good times. Free markets are not the be all and end all. Average people don't feel the good times and have to pay for the bad times.

I have been made redundant in recent years with my job going to india, all my other colleagues had their jobs moved to Hungary so it is a concern. We had 5 developers quit last Friday cos the code they were getting back from india was crap and they flagged it up, no-one listened. so from 20 developers we now have gone down to 7 for a product that the company is investing 90% of its marketing budget on. This is classic race to the bottom stuff. Scared of more resignations the company has promised not to replace those developers with people from India.

Our best selling product is now made in Hungary and the quality of service from there is shocking. Hungary is eastern Europe by the way so are people nervy about their jobs going? Yes they are. Do they talk about it often? Yes they do.

Poland is one of the few places in Europe that has seen a massive decline in poverty, why's that do you think? Either all the poor people are in London or companies are using it for cheap labour.

Lets see how Brexit looks once the dust settles.

Yeah it is a concern, and it definitely happens. But the eastern europe / western Europe divide in wages isn't anywhere near the USA / Mexico wages divide.

I'm sorry you lost your job. It does suck.

I personally don't know what to think about free trade agreements with low wage economies. I understand the basic economic theory that both nations gain from it ... But .

 

[devilish]

The article doesn't directly link to Brexit but does explain well why people are fecked off with neo liberalist politicscs and are sick of the few making a killing why the average joe rarely feel the good times. Free markets are not the be all and end all. Average people don't feel the good times and have to pay for the bad times.

I have been made redundant in recent years with my job going to india, all my other colleagues had their jobs moved to Hungary so it is a concern. We had 5 developers quit last Friday cos the code they were getting back from india was crap and they flagged it up, no-one listened. so from 20 developers we now have gone down to 7 for a product that the company is investing 90% of its marketing budget on. This is classic race to the bottom stuff. Scared of more resignations the company has promised not to replace those developers with people from India.

Our best selling product is now made in Hungary and the quality of service from there is shocking. Hungary is eastern Europe by the way so are people nervy about their jobs going? Yes they are. Do they talk about it often? Yes they do.

Poland is one of the few places in Europe that has seen a massive decline in poverty, why's that do you think? Either all the poor people are in London or companies are using it for cheap labour.

Lets see how Brexit looks once the dust settles.

Im so sorry for you mate. I hope holland treats you better then what brexit uk would . After all, according to them, you are now a pesky foreigner who live on benefits and you should therefore be deported

In my opinion you should consider moving to Malta. They speak English, programming jobs are reasonably paid (especially in the gaming industry). Theres free nhs, free childcare and free tertiary education. If you need help let me know.

 

[Stanley Road]

Im so sorry for you mate. I hope holland treats you better then what brexit uk would . After all, according to them, you are now a pesky foreigner who live on benefits and you should therefore be deported

That was 2013 and I started a new job immediately so no claim. but it was the 2nd redundancy here where my job was moved to country with cheaper labour force and low business tax. There is no job protection these days, not in the current set up.

 

[devilish]

That was 2013 and I started a new job immediately so no claim. but it was the 2nd redundancy here where my job was moved to country with cheaper labour force and low business tax. There is no job protection these days, not in the current set up.

That's, good to know. If you ever be in that situation again and you consider relocating just send me a PM. I will do my best to help

 

[Adisa]

Some will not be happy.

 

[devilish]

Wasn't Europe supposed to go whistle?

 

[Fener1907]

Wasn't Europe supposed to go whistle?

They are. We're gonna... we're gonna... draw a load of cocks on the notes and deliver them in old duffle bags to show our disdain for them.

 

[GloryHunter07]

No there are some people in this country who can't fall much further. That's my point.

I would say that many people simply see a system that does not appear to provide for them economically and never has done. They also perceive this system as providing for others. When you live in the old pit villages and towns where there has been no work for 4 or 5 decades, and no hope of any in the future, and every promise of a better future for the past 40 or 50 years has proven to be a false one then voting for change carries little risk. You should see some of the towns around here - they look post apocalyptic. And they are in a way. They've been abandoned after their use as the engine rooms of the industrial revolution came to an end. People die on average 7 years younger then others living just 200 miles away in the same country.

So is this all the fault of the EU?

 

[711]

So is this all the fault of the EU?

Read what the man says:

Perhaps yes. What I'm positing is that when you are living on nothing, and have never had anything, and your folks lived on nothing and never had anything, that is an economy that for them has already tanked. It's hard for for those of us who do ok to realise that for many people things don't seem as if they could actually get any worse. No prospects, no hopes, no aspirations, real poverty, substance & alcohol abuse, mental and physical ill health etc It's a cliche but it's genuinely seriously grim in these old industrial areas. There are communities here where unemployment goes back over several generations now ( I use the term "communities" lightly - most semblance of community has broken down). Rightly or wrongly a lot of people in these areas voted to leave simply because it was seen as an alternative to a system perceived as having abandoned them and there is a strong argument that it has. They were offered a vision, possibly a blatantly false one, where they would be better off and they voted for it. The fact that they might have been lied to doesn't make them necessarily stupid - just desperate enough to vote for something that might improve their lot.

 

[Jippy]

Some will not be happy.

Wow, this actually raises hopes that constructive negotiations could potentially now get underway.
Underlines the folly of the whole Brexit saga, mind.

EDIT: The Brexiteers are quick to refute it.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/41815...ally-quit-and-talk-trade-deals-with-the-bloc/

 

[Barca84]

Before I moved to France I lived not far from the area you're talking about, in Lincolnshire, and regularly went through Nottingham and surrounding districts. Then go and visit some African towns and villages or many other places in the world and see how far you can really fall, the government have a responsibility to these people and it is their fault that people are in those situations.
We are again back to ignorance, I know these people were desperate but if they were informed they would know it's only going to make it worse , not better and it will get worse for them, even if they think it can't.
But the vast majority of the 17million who voted for Brexit were not poor, what is their excuse.

I don't want to keep banging on about UK poverty as it is only part of the Brexit conundrum but this post needs a response. This comparison you seem bent on making with third world poverty is irrelevant. The UK is not Africa. Any accurate measurement of poverty here is taken against a UK median. I'm afraid your stance on this hints at the belief, held in some quarters, that the poor aren't really poor and should be thankful (as you seem to be suggesting) that they're not living in some cholera infested hut on the other side of the world. That's pretty offensive as is the idea that you can glean some understanding of UK poverty merely by passing through an area or two in your car en route to somewhere else. It's a bit more complex than the fact that there aren't rows of Dickensian slums to navigate whilst trying to get to somewhere else.

There can be endless debates about the measurement of absolute vs relative poverty etc but whichever way you look at it when a country that has the 6th largest economy in the world has, according to substantial and respected reports, 21% of it's population in poverty there is a clear and stark economic divide and it's one that no doubt played it's part in the Brexit result. Like I said - rightly or wrongly some have been so badly served that they have voted for change.

I've just had a read back through some of your posts in this thread just to make sure I'm not taking you up wrong as nuance can get lost on a forum such as this. But it appears not - you've been quite consistent in your appalling arrogance, heightened self regard, and constant belittling of the Brexit vote. I'll leave you to it.

 

[rcoobc]

https://www.ft.com/content/7d26e4e9-2eb0-3afb-94ec-5874e178c311

read it

http://bfy.tw/DF5B - should be top search result, more likely to work if the above does not

 

[Stanley Road]

I don't want to keep banging on about UK poverty as it is only part of the Brexit conundrum but this post needs a response. This comparison you seem bent on making with third world poverty is irrelevant. The UK is not Africa. Any accurate measurement of poverty here is taken against a UK median. I'm afraid your stance on this hints at the belief, held in some quarters, that the poor aren't really poor and should be thankful (as you seem to be suggesting) that they're not living in some cholera infested hut on the other side of the world. That's pretty offensive as is the idea that you can glean some understanding of UK poverty merely by passing through an area or two in your car en route to somewhere else. It's a bit more complex than the fact that there aren't rows of Dickensian slums to navigate whilst trying to get to somewhere else.

There can be endless debates about the measurement of absolute vs relative poverty etc but whichever way you look at it when a country that has the 6th largest economy in the world has, according to substantial and respected reports, 21% of it's population in poverty there is a clear and stark economic divide and it's one that no doubt played it's part in the Brexit result. Like I said - rightly or wrongly some have been so badly served that they have voted for change.

I've just had a read back through some of your posts in this thread just to make sure I'm not taking you up wrong as nuance can get lost on a forum such as this. But it appears not - you've been quite consistent in your appalling arrogance, heightened self regard, and constant belittling of the Brexit vote. I'll leave you to it.

I think you just put Paul back in his box

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I don't want to keep banging on about UK poverty as it is only part of the Brexit conundrum but this post needs a response. This comparison you seem bent on making with third world poverty is irrelevant. The UK is not Africa. Any accurate measurement of poverty here is taken against a UK median. I'm afraid your stance on this hints at the belief, held in some quarters, that the poor aren't really poor and should be thankful (as you seem to be suggesting) that they're not living in some cholera infested hut on the other side of the world. That's pretty offensive as is the idea that you can glean some understanding of UK poverty merely by passing through an area or two in your car en route to somewhere else. It's a bit more complex than the fact that there aren't rows of Dickensian slums to navigate whilst trying to get to somewhere else.

There can be endless debates about the measurement of absolute vs relative poverty etc but whichever way you look at it when a country that has the 6th largest economy in the world has, according to substantial and respected reports, 21% of it's population in poverty there is a clear and stark economic divide and it's one that no doubt played it's part in the Brexit result. Like I said - rightly or wrongly some have been so badly served that they have voted for change.

I've just had a read back through some of your posts in this thread just to make sure I'm not taking you up wrong as nuance can get lost on a forum such as this. But it appears not - you've been quite consistent in your appalling arrogance, heightened self regard, and constant belittling of the Brexit vote. I'll leave you to it.

You are missing my point - the point you made is that they can't be any worse off, I'm saying yes they can and voting for Brexit is not going to make their life better. I can understand a vote for change but not when the change is for a worse situation. What is arrogant about thinking a Brexit vote is a bad idea because it's glaringly obvious that it is and the poorest are the ones that are going to suffer the most.
I know some extremely rich people and I know some extremely poor people so I could find it offensive that you think I'm living in some ivory tower casting aspersions. There are clever poor people and dumb rich people. Brexit is dumb.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

I think you just put Paul back in his box

Not on your Nelly

 

[rcoobc]

Brexit is going to cost around £100bn. Probably more, but we'll start with that figure.

That's £1500 for every man, woman and child in the UK. Note the children aspect.

How many would have voted Leave if they had to personally pay that. A £6k bill for a family of four.

 

[Barca84]

You are missing my point - the point you made is that they can't be any worse off, I'm saying yes they can and voting for Brexit is not going to make their life better. I can understand a vote for change but not when the change is for a worse situation. What is arrogant about thinking a Brexit vote is a bad idea because it's glaringly obvious that it is and the poorest are the ones that are going to suffer the most.
I know some extremely rich people and I know some extremely poor people so I could find it offensive that you think I'm living in some ivory tower casting aspersions. There are clever poor people and dumb rich people. Brexit is dumb.

No. The point I made is that some people, rightly or wrongly, believe it can't get worse for them. I don't believe for a minute, from anything that you've posted that you have an understanding of that nor any empathy for those who find themselves in that position. Quite the opposite in fact.

So you've missed my point entirely. Dumb comes in many guises.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

No. The point I made is that some people, rightly or wrongly, believe it can't get worse for them. I don't believe for a minute, from anything that you've posted that you have an understanding of that nor any empathy for those who find themselves in that position. Quite the opposite in fact.

So you've missed my point entirely. Dumb comes in many guises.

I've said several times that I have understood what you are saying, and I understand why you are saying it but you don't seem to want to accept it, doesn't make the reason people voted that way right. So you're the one missing my point entirely..

 

[Barca84]

Brexit is going to cost around £100bn. Probably more, but we'll start with that figure.

That's £1500 for every man, woman and child in the UK. Note the children aspect.

How many would have voted Leave if they had to personally pay that. A £6k bill for a family of four.

What a ridiculous question. And where do you get the confident prediction of £100bn + from? Everything I've seen quotes a range of scenarios but nothing close to that figure.

 

[rcoobc]

What a ridiculous question. And where do you get the confident prediction of £100bn + from? Everything I've seen quotes a range of scenarios but nothing close to that figure.

SOMEONE has to pay it, after all.

And what on earth are you on about???

The EU's opening gambit is a €100bn bill.

Plus another £0.5bn for moving the EU science out of the UK. There will be other instances of such bills

Then there is the damage to the wider economy.

What about Jobs moving to the EU? What about workers not coming to this country? And Euro clearing

So what will the UK economy look like after 13 years?

Brexit to cost Britain more than 5% of GDP by 2030, say City economists
This is an estimate of the loss of GDP relative to where the economy would have been without Brexit and adds up to more than £100bn in today's money

So you are right, the £100bn figure is way off the mark. It's £100bn per year!*

*By 2030