Consequences of Brexit [part 7] Read first post before posting

[Penistone999 10]

The commons has been suspended because of rain water leaking into the chamber.  Id have carried on as Rats are quite happy in water. 

[apelike 10]

13 hours ago, Obelix said:

Oh you finally had chance to look up the signalling system did you that you were unaware of a few days ago...

I was aware of it a few days ago hence my reply about when it was upgraded according to you, so please keep up. At least I took the time to check on your claim and found it to be false so I now know the reason why you sidestepped the issue and have not replied to my question in post 1619.

 

13 hours ago, Obelix said:

That was the nationalisation cost.

No that was the loans given to it before it was taken into public ownership (not Nationalised) on 22nd Feb 2008. Previous to that in January 2008 Northern Rock's loan from the Bank of England had grown to £26bn.

 

[Obelix 11]

So, taking into public ownership is not nationalisation?

 

Yeah right. If you are going to wilfully be that obtuse then you are just another Brexiter I'll just ignore and not waste debate on.

30 minutes ago, Penistone999 said:

The commons has been suspended because of rain water leaking into the chamber.  Id have carried on as Rats are quite happy in water. 

Well they have been saying it needs renovation for quite some time now!

[apelike 10]

12 minutes ago, Obelix said:

So, taking into public ownership is not nationalisation?

In this case no as Nationalisation is with the intent to keep in public ownership and the intent of this was that it was to be sold on at a later date.

[Car Boot 10]

2 hours ago, Obelix said:

So, taking into public ownership is not nationalisation?

 

Yeah right. If you are going to wilfully be that obtuse then you are just another Brexiter I'll just ignore and not waste debate on.

Well they have been saying it needs renovation for quite some time now!

The pouring of public money into the banking system was certainly NOT nationalisation.

 

It was the socialisation of private banking debt.

 

Bailout of the banks was socialism for the rich. Harsh capitalism for the poor. Just how the EU likes it.

Edited April 4, 2019 by Car Boot

[hobinfoot 25]

3 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Are you predicting a Labour win at a general election?

Nice one. I think the EU were more likely to be referring to who ever takes over from TM as leader of the Conservatives.

[Car Boot 10]

Very good article here:

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/04/piers-morgan-why-as-a-former-remainer-id-now-back-leave/

 

Piers Morgan: why, as a former Remainer, I’d now back Leave

 

"I voted Remain, and still don’t think Brexit is a good idea. However, if there were to be a second EU referendum, I would vote Leave. Not because I’ve experienced some Damascene conversion to the Brexit cause — I haven’t met anyone who has changed their mind about it and suspect these people don’t exist outside Alastair Campbell’s hysterical Remoaner mind — but because I would be so furious at a second referendum happening at all.

 

What’s going on now is a disgrace: a House of Commons packed with Remainer MPs trying everything in its power to reverse the 2016 result or dilute Brexit so much that it ceases to resemble anything that Leavers voted for. I find this assault on our democracy far more sinister than anything that might befall us in the event of a no-deal departure from Europe, not least because those shouting loudest about what a disaster no deal would be — like Campbell and Tony Blair — all once assured me that if Britain didn’t join the euro, it would also be a disaster, and in fact it was the best thing we never did. Also, let’s not forget these were the same people who dragged us into the calamitous war with Iraq — without even contemplating the notion of a ‘People’s Vote’.

 

As for the patronising idea that no Leavers knew what they were voting for, I simply say this: they all assumed voting Leave meant ‘leaving the European Union’, as stated on the ballot paper, not partly staying in it. So the much-scorned ‘crashing out with no deal’ option is most in line with what people probably thought they were getting."

 

I also believe that the immense damage being done to our democracy by those who refuse to respect a democratic outcome far outweighs any small economic turbulence we may encounter from a No Deal Brexit.

 

 

Edited April 4, 2019 by Car Boot

[tinfoilhat 11]

2 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

Very good article here:

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/04/piers-morgan-why-as-a-former-remainer-id-now-back-leave/

 

Piers Morgan: why, as a former Remainer, I’d now back Leave

 

I voted Remain, and still don’t think Brexit is a good idea. However, if there were to be a second EU referendum, I would vote Leave. Not because I’ve experienced some Damascene conversion to the Brexit cause — I haven’t met anyone who has changed their mind about it and suspect these people don’t exist outside Alastair Campbell’s hysterical Remoaner mind — but because I would be so furious at a second referendum happening at all.

 

What’s going on now is a disgrace: a House of Commons packed with Remainer MPs trying everything in its power to reverse the 2016 result or dilute Brexit so much that it ceases to resemble anything that Leavers voted for. I find this assault on our democracy far more sinister than anything that might befall us in the event of a no-deal departure from Europe, not least because those shouting loudest about what a disaster no deal would be — like Campbell and Tony Blair — all once assured me that if Britain didn’t join the euro, it would also be a disaster, and in fact it was the best thing we never did. Also, let’s not forget these were the same people who dragged us into the calamitous war with Iraq — without even contemplating the notion of a ‘People’s Vote’.

 

As for the patronising idea that no Leavers knew what they were voting for, I simply say this: they all assumed voting Leave meant ‘leaving the European Union’, as stated on the ballot paper, not partly staying in it. So the much-scorned ‘crashing out with no deal’ option is most in line with what people probably thought they were getting.

We’ll now you’ve said Morgan is board with leave, I know we should definately remain!

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

17 hours ago, Car Boot said:

Please, lets have no more personal attacks. Thank you.

Certain posters are keyboard warriors, they must get some kind of a buzz with posts that either start or end with calling the poster derogatory names. Surprised this has seemingly by-passed the Mods somehow.

 

Angel1.

[Halibut 12]

7 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

Very good article here:

 

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/04/piers-morgan-why-as-a-former-remainer-id-now-back-leave/

 

Piers Morgan: why, as a former Remainer, I’d now back Leave

 

 

If you're relying on Piers Moron to bolster your argument, you're seriously lacking in credibility.

[Car Boot 10]

24 minutes ago, Halibut said:

If you're relying on Piers Moron to bolster your argument, you're seriously lacking in credibility.

What was it Piers stated in the article that you disagree with?

[Delayed 461]

3 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

What was it Piers stated in the article that you disagree with?

Nothing probably. He just doesn't like piers Morgan (most likely because he's chums with trump). 

Morgan could say the sun is hot and he would most likely argue against it.