So they voted to have no trading arrangements with the EU at all?
Yeah i don't think that they did, well very few anyway. Theres always a few crackpots.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
So they voted to have no trading arrangements with the EU at all?
Yeah i don't think that they did, well very few anyway. Theres always a few crackpots.
It's a coup put in place by chancers seeking to make cash from chaos; all the rest is just window-dressing. This has nothing to do with patriotism, immigration, 'Blitz spirit' etc etc. It's a scam.
Owen Patterson MP (Brexiter & advisor to "Leave Means Leave"):
"Only a madman would leave the single market".
Surely just means that revoking Article 50 is the likeliest option at the moment?
These sentences make no sense at all. EFTA and the EU aren't the same thing and yes they have a trade agreement that forms the EEA which I already mentioned. The referendum was about the EU not the EEA nor the EUCU, people haven't been asked any questions about these, so you can't just make up what they think about it.
Nothing related to votes happens in France.
It's a rigged game to be fair. Because we don't create our own money, we're in a bad position regardless. The EU was never meant to be gotten out of.
I know they are not the same. But voting out of the EU don't mean we can't have an EEA type agreement.
I was referring of course to the stupid taxation and the inhumanity in goverment.
I don't think a second referendum would be undemocratic (it's more like a somewhat more informed choice at this point) and I think you were mostly joking with this anyway but if anyone takes it seriously, it's not a good argument. After an election, a new government is formed: that is to say, the result of the vote is carried out.
This is more like a scenario where no party can form a government, all coalition talks break down and after a while they hold another general election because there's no other way out of the stalemate. Actually, that's not a bad analogy and I don't just say that because it's mine.
There is no stupid taxation and no inhumanity in government at this point in time.
And in an EEA type agreement is a deal which you claimed wasn't what people voted for.
Are the yellow tops still protesting or has that stopped?
The yellow tops have no actual claims and they are 60k in an electorate of 45m people.
I can't look up the stats right now, but didn't the UK vote for pretty much all of the laws set by the EU, like 97% or something?. I remember reading some of the ones 'forced' on us and iirc they were beneficial to the common man. This was ages ago that I read up on this so feel free to correct me.
Regarding the money system, how do you think a no deal Brexit would improve this for the better?
That's what Farage is hoping for. He becomes even more irrelevant if the UK actually leave.
It's not a vote. It's not even legally binding. At best the referendum is a opinion poll. And people can change their opinion....especially when the original was made based on mistruths and outright lies.
The second referendum is necessary because none of the claims made by the exit camp during first referendum can be delivered.
Either deliver all that was promised or come up with new reasons for brexit and let public vote again.
I hope so. It depends on the amendments that are allowed to the no-deal motion today, in my opinion.
You once claimed that it shouldn’t be possible for countries to be in debt because they can just print more money. Are you sure you should be casting judgement on the pros and cons of money systems
That tweet is actually quite scary. Everything is going to plan for the Hard Brexiters.
You once claimed that it shouldn’t be possible for countries to be in debt because they can just print more money. Are you sure you should be casting judgement on the pros and cons of money systems
He didn't really did he?
Though it would put his Brexit posts in a context that makes sense.
He absolutely has to have money on this.
A lame duck, stubborn, 'useful idiot ' Prime Minister in place too. No wonder there's so few calls for her to resign.
If we vote for an extension and the EU reject it, what's more likely to happen? We just leave with No Deal or we revoke A50?
I'm sure JRM has. Not convinced Farage is that bright.
"Accidental" no deal looking more and more likely. Hold me Steve.
Why isn't Intelligence informing the government? They must know.
If parliament vote against a no deal then it surely has to be revocation I’d imagine.
A horrible cnut.
Agreed.
Good grief, if true, it should be put as his tagline. Then people won't waste time replying.You once claimed that it shouldn’t be possible for countries to be in debt because they can just print more money Are you sure you should be casting judgement on the pros and cons of money systems
Could be a number of reasons. Perhaps telling the truth, and prosecuting all those involved, would be viewed as destroying public faith in our politics?
We would probably need parliament to vote in favour of rescinding art 50. Given that the Government is incompetent and MPs cant agree on what type of cereal they want for breakfast, we could be in trouble.
The issue is that they need to vote for revocation, they are good at voting against things but there is nobody to vote for something.
Simply put, they have nothing to lose in granting an extension. On the other hand there is albeit a slim possibility of a election or new referendum, which may turn in their favour. So why not? No real reason will be expected. I don't see any trouble in getting this extended.
No way A50 is revoked , it will be a field day in the press with the pitchforks out for those who voted. "Enemies of the people " , etc.
He did. For the life of me I can’t remember what thread it was, but the post was iconic. He also talked about legally hiring assassins to kill people, among other things. It’s probably my favourite post ever since I’ve been on the caf.
Guy said that he wants to know what the government is doing with the money to put the country in debt, because a country can’t be in debt if they can print more money, which means that something suspicious is going on
This is good information. Putting him on ignore. I would encourage everyone to do the same
He did. For the life of me I can’t remember what thread it was, but the post was iconic. He also talked about legally hiring assassins to kill people, among other things. It’s probably my favourite post ever since I’ve been on the caf.
Guy said that he wants to know what the government is doing with the money to put the country in debt, because a country can’t be in debt if they can print more money, which means that something suspicious is going on
It was the Alex Jones thread if I remember
If A50 is going to be revoked, which is unlikely anyway, I could only see it happening if it came from within. If the reason to do it was the people vote for it, or MPs decide to do it on the basis that voters were sold a lie in the referendum and they convinced themselves this invalidated the referendum result, or something along those lines. It couldnt happen as a result of the EU holding a gun to our heads, which is what a refusal to extend the negotiation period would be interpreted as in the British media.
If you give Britain two choices 1) gouge your own eye out with a fork, or 2) appear subservient to Europe, its going to be option 1 every single time.
If you give Britain two choices 1) gouge your own eye out with a fork, or 2) appear subservient to Europe, its going to be option 1 every single time.
I guess we're both reading that article a little differently then.
No matter. As for the key point you mention, I've been saying that all along, No point extending just to rinse and repeat. It has to be for something different. That is why I can't understand the MPs being whipped at the moment for "malthouse" – the EU have already rejected that have they not?