The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting

[I1L2T3 10]

1 hour ago, apelike said:

And this is from someone who was quick to bail out and leave because of money.. I think that says a lot! To quote a line from Gone With the Wind "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn" 

 

You chose to bail as soon as you could and yet tzijlstra chose to stay both were choices but one I respect more than the other.. Care to guess which one!

Thanks for the help but not really needed.

There are some in between too. I’ve spent the last two years getting EU passports sorted for my kids, and a British passport for my wife. I’ve got a substantial proportion of my liquid assets into other currencies with quite a lot in Euro because two of my kids live on the continent now. We’ve got offshore Euro-denominated accounts in three countries so we can shift money around very easily.

 

Ive had to make quite a few financial decisions and changes, and have worked hard to ensure rights for my family don’t change too much.

 

Most of the family are still in the U.K. It’s up to people like you and your leaders about which way you want this to go. You’re not doing a great job.

[L00b 441]

39 minutes ago, tzijlstra said:

Nothing <...>

The £65 is an application fee, not a 'registration fee' like apelike claimed, and who says 'application' means some will inevitably be turned down, inevitably wrongly so (what with the HO moving the goal posts time and again about required documentation in support for the settled status scheme), besides the fact that this is a retrospective head tax.

 

But let's not have facts get in the way of handwavery at unpalatable truths.

Edited December 28, 2018 by L00b

[apelike 10]

58 minutes ago, L00b said:

The £65 is an application fee, not a 'registration fee' like apelike claimed, and who says 'application' means some will inevitably be turned down, inevitably wrongly so (what with the HO moving the goal posts time and again about required documentation in support for the settled status scheme), besides the fact that this is a retrospective head tax.

 

But let's not have facts get in the way of handwavery at unpalatable truths.

But the facts are that is has been described as a registration fee and also as an application fee, in fact you will have to apply to be registered as the people who do will inevitably be on a register.

1 hour ago, I1L2T3 said:

It’s up to people like you and your leaders about which way you want this to go.

No Its not up to me and as said many times before I have no input in any of the government or parliaments decisions, what happens now in the full control of them.

Edited December 28, 2018 by apelike

[I1L2T3 10]

4 minutes ago, apelike said:

But the facts are that is has been described as a registration fee and also as an application fee, in fact you will have to apply to be registered as the people who do will inevitably be on a register.

No Its not up to me and as said many times before I have no input in any of the government or parliaments decisions, what happens now in the full control of them.

You can’t weasel out of it like that. You are a foot soldier for Brexit on this forum, supporting many of the arguments of Brexit leaders on a regular basis.

 

They can only promote through their agenda with the active support of people like yourself.

 

If you genuinely just do want to be passive, and just a passenger in this process then why are you posting?

[apelike 10]

1 minute ago, I1L2T3 said:

You can’t weasel out of it like that. You are a foot soldier for Brexit on this forum, supporting many of the arguments of Brexit leaders on a regular basis.

I can as I think you will find nothing of the sort in any of my previous posts on brexit, and especially as I have never supported any brexit leaders on any basis. I have also never supported any of the brexit campaigns either especially as I dont watch TV or buy newspapers. 

6 minutes ago, I1L2T3 said:

They can only promote through their agenda with the active support of people like yourself.

What you mean is they gave me the opportunity to vote knowing full well that I have no input as to what happens after despite Cameron promising the result would be carried out. The voting paper asked if I wanted to remain or leave and I crossed leave.

[apelike 10]

9 minutes ago, I1L2T3 said:

If you genuinely just do want to be passive, and just a passenger in this process then why are you posting?

Because I'm sick of hearing the constant moaning from remainers who just cannot accept that people voted differently to them. Constantly being told that the referendum was advisory only. Being told that it was the educationally challenged old people that voted leave. Being told that those that voted leave dont care about the future of their children or grand children. Being told that the majority of the population didnt vote to leave when that's pretty obvious as in our democracy only the electorate and the voters count. Being told that the Russians skewed the results.... Unfortunately there is plenty more but I will stop at that. 

 

But like it or not the main reason is that I have the right to post on SF just as much as anybody else and if people dont like what I post then they can use the ignore button or simply just dont post as its a 2 way thing. Notice how polite I normally am as well unlike many who post on here.

[Litotes 63]

And I am sick of leavers presenting their  opinions as thought they were sacrosanct and that they were gods-given source of knowledge of what the country wanted.

 

You seem to choose to ignore that over 50 % of the population did not vote to leave.

 

You seem to ignore that it has been proven that the leave campaign broke the LAW and have been proven to have done so.

 

You seem to ignore the fact that leavers are now saying (in their droves) that they want a second referendum so they can change their minds - as advocated by David Davies.

 

So we are both sick of hearing each other - status quo.

 

[apelike 10]

14 minutes ago, Litotes said:

You seem to choose to ignore that over 50 % of the population did not vote to leave.

See previous post as this is a classic example.

15 minutes ago, Litotes said:

You seem to ignore that it has been proven that the leave campaign broke the LAW and have been proven to have done so.

And you seem to ignore that it has also been proven that remain broke the law as well.

 

[apelike 10]

27 minutes ago, Litotes said:

You seem to ignore the fact that leavers are now saying (in their droves) that they want a second referendum so they can change their minds - as advocated by David Davies.

Not the David Davis bit again.. He was not talking about our democracy but the failure of the EU to allow the democratic elected countries to be able to change their minds on certain points once they have been admitted into the EU no matter how you try and spin it. 

 

Quote from the Independent:

 

Mr Davis said: “If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy”.

At the time he was criticising the EU for imposing irreversible laws on member states - something the current Brexit Secretary said was "not just undemocratic, it is anti-democratic”.

Edited December 28, 2018 by apelike

[SnailyBoy 10]

7 minutes ago, apelike said:

Not the David Davis bit again.. He was not talking about our democracy but the failure of the EU to allow the democratic elected countries to be able to change their minds on certain points once they have been admitted into the EU no matter how you try and spin it. 

 

Quote:

 

Mr Davis said: “If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy”.

At the time he was criticising the EU for imposing irreversible laws on member states - something the current Brexit Secretary said was "not just undemocratic, it is anti-democratic”.

Ahhh, so a different democracy, not your every day type of democracy.

 

So when should our democracy get to change its mind?

Edited December 28, 2018 by SnailyBoy

[Litotes 63]

8 minutes ago, apelike said:

Mr Davis said: “If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy”.

It still remains a valid statement.

 

In the same way that you seem to forget this one - In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. - Nigel Farage 2016

 

You didn't disagree at the time - so I imagine you still stand by the sentiment.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Litotes

[apelike 10]

Just now, Litotes said:

It still remains a valid statement.

It does indeed but not in the context of what you state.