Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[SE16 3LN]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

Voting no and leave, now that's despicable.

Maybe, don't know anyone who did.

[jambomjm74]

2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Voting no and leave, now that's despicable.

Isn’t it just a similar contradiction to Yes and Remain ... 

[ri Alban]

10 minutes ago, jambomjm74 said:

Isn’t it just a similar contradiction to Yes and Remain ... 

No, remain sparked Indyref2. I'll vote accordingly after independence.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

On 16/04/2019 at 15:57, IMac said:

 Considering about a million of them are dead. The will of the people has died with them.

 

Is that supposed to be an argument against a second referendum? We want to respect whether people wanted their graves in or out of the EU?

[jambomjm74]

19 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

No, remain sparked Indyref2. I'll vote accordingly after independence.

No, it added to the fuel already their for many.. 

Confidence, about something that may or may not happen. I wouldn’t hold your breath 

[Craig_]

19 hours ago, AlimOzturk said:

Brexit party leading almost every poll for the European Elections. That's scary shit not just for UK but the EU. 

 

What is the chance they could run for any future GE? 

 

Would split the right-wing vote in a GE, so fine by me.

[ri Alban]

46 minutes ago, jambomjm74 said:

No, it added to the fuel already their for many.. 

Confidence, about something that may or may not happen. I wouldn’t hold your breath 

It's happening, don't worry about that.

Hello PM, would you like to permit an Indyref2, or next election would you prefer a UDI. Your choice.

[Unknown user]

4 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'm not the one defending the pro EU death plan. I commented because I think its disgusting. If you're defending it you need to question yourself, not me.

Defending a pro EU death plan? I think I'll leave this here, it doesn't need me to point out how ridiculous you're being

[Unknown user]

4 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'm not the one defending the pro EU death plan. I commented because I think its disgusting. If you're defending it you need to question yourself, not me.

Defending a pro EU death plan?

 

I think I'll leave this here, it doesn't need me to point out how utterly ridiculous you're being. 

[Unknown user]

4 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'm not the one defending the pro EU death plan. I commented because I think its disgusting. If you're defending it you need to question yourself, not me.

Defending a pro EU death plan?

 

I think I'll leave this here, it doesn't need me to point out how utterly ridiculous you're being. 

[jambomjm74]

13 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

It's happening, don't worry about that.

Hello PM, would you like to permit an Indyref2, or next election would you prefer a UDI. Your choice.

Very well, I’m sure the 55% silent majority have changed their minds... and cannae wait for independence. Dream on

[Francis Albert]

4 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

Acknowledging that old people die, and that in the current world it would tend to help various countries' politics (the US at the forefront--people like Trump can't get elected without old, entitled, racist dinosaurs), isn't the least bit despicable.

You do know that all these young people will be old people before very long? And all those old people were young people not that long ago. Many of the young people who voted for JFK, demonstrated against the Vietnam war and (ludicrous as it seems given what we know now) worshipped Mao and Ho Chi Minh later voted for Nixon and Regan. 

Trump would not have been elected if many young people and huge numbers the opposite of entitled had not voted for him.

The idea that old people dying will lead to a major change in the balance of the political spectrum is just nonsense. Or wishful thinking.

And dismissing old people as some sort of "deplorables" is undemocratic and likely to be somewhat counterproductive.

PS and of course young people were at the forefront of giving support to some of the worst regimes in the last century.

 

 

Edited April 18, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Watt-Zeefuik]

14 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

I believe the US have indicated that if the good Friday agreement is broken as a result of Brexit, their will be no trade deal.

 

In addition to getting very pissed off at a number of erg members for being condescending pricks.

 

It was Nancy Pelosi, who as Speaker of the House (which in the US is kind of a combination of Bercow's and Leadsom's jobs) doesn't have much formal authority over trade deals. However, any trade deal has to be ratified by the Senate, which even though it's controlled by Republicans, has rules which would allow united Democratic opposition to effectively block it. Pelosi is the most powerful Democrat in Washington right now, so her laying this down that sternly should signal unified Democratic opposition, which is effectively enough to kill any deal getting ratified, particularly since there's at least a handful of Republicans of Irish Catholic descent who would join them.

[Justin Z]

5 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

What have you got against the elderly mate? They require help, support and respect not the kind of prejudice you chuck their way. Odious

 

I've not a thing against the elderly. My OAP neighbours are absolutely wonderful people, not a nasty bone in either of their bodies. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for the overwhelming majority of old white folks in the United States that voted for Trump, or blue haired ***** like this who support him in the UK. If it were up to me, the ones like my neighbours would live to be 150, and they would be the overwhelming majority. Sadly, they are not.

 

So wind your pearl-clutching little neck in, and work on your reading comprehension, ta.

[Francis Albert]

3 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

I've not a thing against the elderly. My OAP neighbours are absolutely wonderful people, not a nasty bone in either of their bodies. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for the overwhelming majority of old white folks in the United States that voted for Trump, or blue haired ***** like this who support him in the UK. If it were up to me, the ones like my neighbours would live to be 150, and they would be the overwhelming majority. Sadly, they are not.

 

So wind your pearl-clutching little neck in, and work on your reading comprehension, ta.

You really seem to have some anger problems. The majority of old white folks may have voted for Trump but it wasn't an overwhelming majority. Lots voted for Clinton.

And your example of blue haired whatevers demonstrates hairist prejudice (that must surely exist as a category by now).

 

 

[Francis Albert]

4 hours ago, Ugly American said:

 

It was Nancy Pelosi, who as Speaker of the House (which in the US is kind of a combination of Bercow's and Leadsom's jobs) doesn't have much formal authority over trade deals. However, any trade deal has to be ratified by the Senate, which even though it's controlled by Republicans, has rules which would allow united Democratic opposition to effectively block it. Pelosi is the most powerful Democrat in Washington right now, so her laying this down that sternly should signal unified Democratic opposition, which is effectively enough to kill any deal getting ratified, particularly since there's at least a handful of Republicans of Irish Catholic descent who would join them.

No outcome of Brexit will breach the Good Friday Agreement. 

[Justin Z]

41 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

You really seem to have some anger problems.

 

 

43 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

The majority of old white folks may have voted for Trump but it wasn't an overwhelming majority. Lots voted for Clinton.

 

 

From here.

 

With 91% of Blacks and 66% of Hispanics voting for Clinton, we can mathematically surmise ≈ 70% of white voters over 50 went with Trump.

 

Totally not an overwhelming majority defined as a supermajority in US Constitutional law or anything.

 

47 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

And your example of blue haired whatevers demonstrates hairist prejudice (that must surely exist as a category by now).

 

 

Absolutely no prejudice at all ?

[ri Alban]

7 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

You really seem to have some anger problems. The majority of old white folks may have voted for Trump but it wasn't an overwhelming majority. Lots voted for Clinton.

And your example of blue haired whatevers demonstrates hairist prejudice (that must surely exist as a category by now).

 

 

Don't ? ? blackholes, then you'll really start him off.   

[ri Alban]

7 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

No outcome of Brexit will breach the Good Friday Agreement. 

 ? ?!

[The Mighty Thor]

9 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

No outcome of Brexit will breach the Good Friday Agreement. 

Itll be interesting to see how that plays out especially as HM Gov & HMRC announced yesterday that technological solutions, or unicorns if you like, are at least 10 years away. 

10 years? That's a mighty long time in a volatile border zone such as Irelands has been in the last 50 years. 

[Justin Z]

2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Don't ? ? blackholes, then you'll really start him off.   

 

 ?

[Francis Albert]

10 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

 

 

 

From here.

 

With 91% of Blacks and 66% of Hispanics voting for Clinton, we can mathematically surmise ≈ 70% of white voters over 50 went with Trump.

 

Totally not an overwhelming majority defined as a supermajority in US Constitutional law or anything.

 

 

 

Absolutely no prejudice at all ?

Thanks for the figures that go some way to confirm what I said -that the old did not vote overwhelmingly for Trump and lots voted for Clinton. I don't know how US constitutional law defines a super majority but in simple English  if 53% (of over 65s) is

overwhelming then No won the Indyref overwhelmingly and Leave were close to an overwhelming victory. In neither case did I hear those outcomes described as such by many.

The old Clinton voters must die too!

 

 

Edited April 19, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Justin Z]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

Thanks for the figures that go some way to confirm what I said -that the old did not vote overwhelmingly for Trump and lots voted for Clinton. I don't know how US constitutional law defines a super majority but in simple English  if 53% (of over 65s) is

overwhelming then No won the Indyref overwhelmingly and Leave were close to an overwhelming victory. In neither case did I hear those outcomes described as such by many.

The old Clinton voters must die too!

 

 

 

2/3, or a 2-to-1 margin, is a supermajority. It was recognised by the framers of the Constitution as the fraction needed for major constitutional change--2/3 vote in both houses of Congress. Why? Because it is an overwhelming majority. By logic, then, 70% of white o50s is an even more overwhelming majority, and goes all the way to confirm the exact opposite of what you said.

[ri Alban]

3 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

 ?

?

[Francis Albert]

5 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

2/3, or a 2-to-1 margin, is a supermajority. It was recognised by the framers of the Constitution as the fraction needed for major constitutional change--2/3 vote in both houses of Congress. Why? Because it is an overwhelming majority. By logic, then, 70% of white o50s is an even more overwhelming majority, and goes all the way to confirm the exact opposite of what you said.

Ok I admit I was wrong.I got confused between the gerontophobia on the Brexit thread and that on this. In the USA race is a much.bigger factor so the issue is not just about age but specifically about aged white people. Nevertheless the votes of 30% of them who voted Clinton  still count so sweeping generalisations are a bit tough on them.

Edited April 19, 2019 by Francis Albert

[ri Alban]

3 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Ok I admit I was wrong.I got confused between the gerontophobia on the Brexit thread and that on this. In the USA race is a much.bigger factor so the issue is not just about age but specifically about aged white people. Nevertheless the votes of 30% of them who voted Clinton  still count so sweeping generalisations are a bit tough on them.

This is the brexit thread.

[RobboM]

6 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

2/3, or a 2-to-1 margin, is a supermajority. It was recognised by the framers of the Constitution as the fraction needed for major constitutional change--2/3 vote in both houses of Congress. Why? Because it is an overwhelming majority. By logic, then, 70% of white o50s is an even more overwhelming majority, and goes all the way to confirm the exact opposite of what you said.

To keep it on the subject of Brexit you could say that the 1975 Referendum to stay in the Common Market was endorsed by a supermajority and then overturned by a simple majority

[Justin Z]

4 minutes ago, RobboM said:

To keep it on the subject of Brexit you could say that the 1975 Referendum to stay in the Common Market was endorsed by a supermajority and then overturned by a simple majority

 

Yes indeed. Even "overturned" is strong since it was an advisory referendum. De-endorsed? But you make an excellent point.

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

This is the brexit thread.

I said I was wrong. What do you want? Ritual disemboweling?

[Francis Albert]

52 minutes ago, RobboM said:

To keep it on the subject of Brexit you could say that the 1975 Referendum to stay in the Common Market was endorsed by a supermajority and then overturned by a simple majority

The 2016 vote wasn't about the Common Market of over 40 years ago.It was about the current and future  EU, a rather different beast.

[ri Alban]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

I said I was wrong. What do you want? Ritual disemboweling?

Of course! ?

 

 

 

[SE16 3LN]

On 18/04/2019 at 16:26, Smithee said:

Defending a pro EU death plan?

 

I think I'll leave this here, it doesn't need me to point out how utterly ridiculous you're being. 

I'll say it again, I didn't raise the issue of the elderly dying as a good thing for remain. I don't know why you felt the need to say this 3 times either, perhaps you've realised that you're the ridiculous one ?

[SE16 3LN]

On 18/04/2019 at 17:54, Justin Z said:

 

I've not a thing against the elderly. My OAP neighbours are absolutely wonderful people, not a nasty bone in either of their bodies. Unfortunately, the same can't be said for the overwhelming majority of old white folks in the United States that voted for Trump, or blue haired ***** like this who support him in the UK. If it were up to me, the ones like my neighbours would live to be 150, and they would be the overwhelming majority. Sadly, they are not.

 

So wind your pearl-clutching little neck in, and work on your reading comprehension, ta.

The "Some of my best friends are old" routine.Have you got a special friend who's black as well. The most stark demographic highlighted in both the election of Trump and the EU referendum was the gender split. In your analysis, all men are *****. You must learn to use statistics correctly and not bend them to fit your moronic prejudices. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

6 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'll say it again, I didn't raise the issue of the elderly dying as a good thing for remain. I don't know why you felt the need to say this 3 times either, perhaps you've realised that you're the ridiculous one ?

 

Could you please explain what you DID mean by this? Because it sounded like you were raising the issue of now-deceased people who voted to Leave, and that their democratic expression should be respected because they can't vote again.

 

i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you're not making a point that silly, but I can't figure out what you are saying, so please elaborate?

[XB52]

7 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'll say it again, I didn't raise the issue of the elderly dying as a good thing for remain. I don't know why you felt the need to say this 3 times either, perhaps you've realised that you're the ridiculous one ?

i hate to tell you this but elderly people die much more regularly than young ones; it's just the way of the World. Haven't seen anyone actually wishing them dead; just pointing out that the elderly are more likely to be Leave voters as they still hark back to the war years and the British Empire.

[Francis Albert]

54 minutes ago, XB52 said:

i hate to tell you this but elderly people die much more regularly than young ones; it's just the way of the World. Haven't seen anyone actually wishing them dead; just pointing out that the elderly are more likely to be Leave voters as they still hark back to the war years and the British Empire.

Older people have always tended to be more conservative and right wing than younger people. That has remained true while generation after generation  of old people have died out.

And you really have to be not just old but ancient to hark remember WW2 and the glories of the British Empire.

 

Edited April 20, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Mikey1874]

Labour is definitely moving towards backing a second referendum.

 

Might be confirmed for the European Elections but if not will be afterwards. 

[SE16 3LN]

17 hours ago, Ugly American said:

 

Could you please explain what you DID mean by this? Because it sounded like you were raising the issue of now-deceased people who voted to Leave, and that their democratic expression should be respected because they can't vote again.

 

i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you're not making a point that silly, but I can't figure out what you are saying, so please elaborate?

It is very simple Ugly. Some remain voters, as you will know having read this thread, are saying that in the event of another referendum the outcome will be considerably different because so many leave voters were old and have already, or will soon die. Further, others have gone on to celebrate this demographic change because they feel that most old people are reactionary racists and bigots. I have challenged this view and I'm getting a kicking for it. 

I don't need the benefit of the doubt from you, or anyone else thank you. My position is ethically correct, and not "silly". On the contrary, asking for clarification is bonkers.

 

[Justin Z]

31 minutes ago, SE16 3LN said:

It is very simple Ugly. Some remain voters, as you will know having read this thread, are saying that in the event of another referendum the outcome will be considerably different because so many leave voters were old and have already, or will soon die. Further, others have gone on to celebrate this demographic change because they feel that most old people are reactionary racists and bigots. I have challenged this view and I'm getting a kicking for it. 

I don't need the benefit of the doubt from you, or anyone else thank you. My position is ethically correct, and not "silly". On the contrary, asking for clarification is bonkers.

 

 

Your position continues to be one arrived at because you've never gotten around to those remedial reading courses, if giving you the absolute best benefit of the doubt. But personally I think you're just trying to be a prick.

[SE16 3LN]

17 hours ago, XB52 said:

i hate to tell you this but elderly people die much more regularly than young ones; it's just the way of the World. Haven't seen anyone actually wishing them dead; just pointing out that the elderly are more likely to be Leave voters as they still hark back to the war years and the British Empire.

Normally I'd ignore your patronising response but I do think you need to know that it makes you look like a dickhead not me.

 

Todays elderly fought the reactionary and racist nazis or suffered hardship during that fight, elected the Socialist govt. of 1945, helped build and fund the health service, helped build the welfare state, stood up to the tories and the rich in numerous industrial disputes particularly in the 70's and early 80's, opposed apartheid and went to jail fighting the poll tax. Some of them voted remain and some voted leave for a range of reasons that are being trashed by remainers on here.

 

What did you do mate?

[SE16 3LN]

6 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

Your position continues to be one arrived at because you've never gotten around to those remedial reading courses, if giving you the absolute best benefit of the doubt. But personally I think you're just trying to be a prick.

Insults and more insults from the Kardashian generation. Try debating with some substance before challenging my ability to read. 

 

[XB52]

3 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

Normally I'd ignore your patronising response but I do think you need to know that it makes you look like a dickhead not me.

 

Todays elderly fought the reactionary and racist nazis or suffered hardship during that fight, elected the Socialist govt. of 1945, helped build and fund the health service, helped build the welfare state, stood up to the tories and the rich in numerous industrial disputes particularly in the 70's and early 80's, opposed apartheid and went to jail fighting the poll tax. Some of them voted remain and some voted leave for a range of reasons that are being trashed by remainers on here.

 

What did you do mate?

????  sorry, no other answer conveys my thoughts on your hilarious post. Only a dickhead calls someone a dickhead for pointing out you are talking shite

[Justin Z]

5 hours ago, XB52 said:

????  sorry, no other answer conveys my thoughts on your hilarious post. Only a dickhead calls someone a dickhead for pointing out you are talking shite

 

Quite

 

People on the thread: Older people obviously die out faster than young people, and we can see with these statistics that as a bloc they voted leave and for Trump at a greater rate, so although we will lose good and bad alike to the ravages of time, subsequent democratic action is likely to skew towards more progressive results

 

SE16: ELDERLY HATING RACIST BIGOTS

 

Everyone:

 

[A Boy Named Crow]

4 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

Quite

 

People on the thread: Older people obviously die out faster than young people, and we can see with these statistics that as a bloc they voted leave and for Trump at a greater rate, so although we will lose good and bad alike to the ravages of time, subsequent democratic action is likely to skew towards more progressive results

 

SE16: ELDERLY HATING RACIST BIGOTS

 

Everyone:

 

The manners, debating skills and general self and interpersonal awareness on this site are at an  all time low, which is really saying something if you cast your mind back to the Pieman out years, the Romanov out years and the independence ‘debate’. 

I skim through here looking for the entertaining posts that still crop up from time to time...but actually engage with these chumps on any kind of serious level? It’s a fool’s errand.

Edited April 22, 2019 by A Boy Named Crow

[shaun.lawson]

On 20/04/2019 at 14:50, Francis Albert said:

Older people have always tended to be more conservative and right wing than younger people. That has remained true while generation after generation  of old people have died out.

 

 

Not any more it won't. Today's young or merely today's under-50s won't head rightwards as they get older. And you know why? Because they haven't got a pot to piss in. 

 

Capitalism does not work when people have no access to capital.

 

15 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

Todays elderly fought the reactionary and racist nazis

 

In order to have done so, someone would need to be aged at least 92. Maths not your strong point, I take it?

 

The colossal majority of today's elderly benefited, enormously, from the postwar settlement. Then they went on to vote for Thatcher, and Blair, and Cameron, and May: dismantling that settlement and pulling the ladder up behind them. Buying social housing and renting it out at ridiculous rates; destroying the housing market in terms of both buying and renting. And Brexit was their final **** you to the young. 

 

Not all old people, certainly. But far, far, far too many of them.

Edited April 22, 2019 by shaun.lawson

[Francis Albert]

6 hours ago, shaun.lawson said:

 

Not any more it won't. Today's young or merely today's under-50s won't head rightwards as they get older. And you know why? Because they haven't got a pot to piss in. 

 

Capitalism does not work when people have no access to capital.

 

 

In order to have done so, someone would need to be aged at least 92. Maths not your strong point, I take it?

 

The colossal majority of today's elderly benefited, enormously, from the postwar settlement. Then they went on to vote for Thatcher, and Blair, and Cameron, and May: dismantling that settlement and pulling the ladder up behind them. Buying social housing and renting it out at ridiculous rates; destroying the housing market in terms of both buying and renting. And Brexit was their final **** you to the young. 

 

Not all old people, certainly. But far, far, far too many of them.

On the first point ... we shall see. Well in my case I suppose later generations will see. I think your view is based more on hope than any real evidence or even much argument. In what might be considered the golden age of capitalism only a tiny minority of people had any sort of pot to piss in. A tendency to move rightwards and to become more conservative was still apparent (as I think has been the case in many different societies). Also, I am not sure the relative poverty that most people suffer when they become "old age pensioners" results in much of a reversal or even moderation of that tendency.

 

In your reply to SE16. as for the "colossal majority of today's elderly having benefitted enormously from the post war settlement ... I am not sure that is true either. My parents generation were better off than they were in the 30s (not "a big ask" as we say today), they didn't have to pay for their teeth and spectacles or for medical treatment, they were rehoused (although in what came to be new slums for old)  but they were still poor by today's standards. They never ate out (nor with any great variety at home), holidays were "days out", a caravan in North Berwick, or just once a week in Morecambe (contrast the young of today's horror that there might be some (imagined) restriction on their freedom to travel freely in Europe) and even a single landline phone only appeared when the first of the children left home. And we were by no means poor by the standards of the time. It was evil old capitalism that delivered modern consumer benefits like cars, washing machines, fridges, TVs, proper holidays and the many other material benefits that most people enjoy and indeed take for granted today.

Edited April 22, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Are the Tories & Labour still having meeting to see if they can find a way forward?

Seems to have went pretty quiet on that front.

[Governor Tarkin]

On 18/04/2019 at 21:09, Justin Z said:

 

 

 

Absolutely no prejudice at all ?

 

[Governor Tarkin]

On 19/04/2019 at 15:29, Francis Albert said:

I said I was wrong. What do you want? Ritual disemboweling?

 

Any spare tickets going? 

Edited April 22, 2019 by Governor Tarkin

[Governor Tarkin]

On 21/04/2019 at 10:36, Justin Z said:

 

Your position continues to be one arrived at because you've never gotten around to those remedial reading courses, if giving you the absolute best benefit of the doubt. But personally I think you're just trying to be a prick.

 

Ooft. 

 

You're a right patronising, arsey, kent when the mood takes you, Justin.