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

[Top Cats Hat 10]

46 minutes ago, woodview said:

Our parliamentarians have to find a solution to an issue where a slim majority instructed them to Leave, and slightly less to stay.

Then the answer really is very simple.

 

If the country is split down the middle then you go for the option which causes less damage which is to remain in the EU. No second referendum, just a vote to revoke Article 50.

 

Once the fuss has died down and people and government can get back to concentrating on the real issues, this nonsense will soon be forgotten.

 

Job done!

[woodview 10]

44 minutes ago, L00b said:

So, in your book, mob rule > rule of law?

 

.

Calling democracy / following the majority 'mob rule' tells us all we need to know.

Maybe you prefer rule by minority, or even better, just the word of one man / woman??

14 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Then the answer really is very simple.

 

If the country is split down the middle then you go for the option which causes less damage which is to remain in the EU. No second referendum, just a vote to revoke Article 50.

 

Once the fuss has died down and people and government can get back to concentrating on the real issues, this nonsense will soon be forgotten.

 

Job done!

Cool idea. Amazingly that's also entirely coincidentally doing the exact option YOU want. Who'd have ever thought you'd suggest that? 🙄

[Top Cats Hat 10]

3 minutes ago, woodview said:

Amazingly that's also entirely coincidentally doing the exact option YOU want. Who'd have ever thought you'd suggest that? 🙄

To be fair, the majority of the population (currently estimated at 54%) agree with me.

 

 

[I1L2T3 10]

1 hour ago, L00b said:

So, in your book, mob rule > rule of law?

 

Ok, got you.

Which is why I said that 2 or 3 are goers, but the rest is still guff just the same.

 

And you can drop the victim act and the veiled attempt at silencing me. My wife is British so yes, thanks to Theresa and her merry band of f***wits with single digit IQs, it still is very much my problem, thanks.

Our family is in a similar position. Im British But wife and kids are dual nationals.

 

We had though that dual nationality would completely protect the kids. We we wrong. Lots of awkward questions and slightly worrying questions from governments/employers/uni in their respective countries. Despite their other EU nationality they are still registered with British nationality too and that is causing issues. They still get the letters. We have still had to work very hard to make sure their primary nationality is updated to the other EU one in various systems.

 

This is a massive headache

[Sidonica 10]

18 minutes ago, woodview said:

 

Cool idea. Amazingly that's also entirely coincidentally doing the exact option YOU want. Who'd have ever thought you'd suggest that? 🙄

As TCH says It would have the largest majority, you are trying to please  everybody and that's impossible.

[L00b 441]

23 minutes ago, woodview said:

Calling democracy / following the majority 'mob rule' tells us all we need to know.

Maybe you prefer rule by minority, or even better, just the word of one man / woman??

It tells you what you want to hear, certainly 

 

I prefer rule by the rule of law, wherein the law gets written by due process (which means by debating and vote of elected representatives, in a Parlementarian democracy).

 

Where the constitutional framework vests sovereignty in the people itself, like in Ireland, you'd have a point.

 

Where that framework vests sovereignty elsewhere, such as in Parliament in the UK, or Kim Junior in North Korea, you don't.

 

And the due process for changing that state of affair in the UK, is to lobby and influence and vote for Parliament to amend/update the constitutional principles of the UK to vest sovereignty in the British people rather than Parliament.

 

Mob rule is not a democracy, never has been. It's an ochlocracy. A model which you and many fellow Brexiters would be quite content to adopt, from so many earlier posts and that tired cliché of the "will of the people". 

[L00b 441]

23 minutes ago, I1L2T3 said:

Our family is in a similar position. Im British But wife and kids are dual nationals.

 

We had though that dual nationality would completely protect the kids. We we wrong. Lots of awkward questions and slightly worrying questions from governments/employers/uni in their respective countries. Despite their other EU nationality they are still registered with British nationality too and that is causing issues. They still get the letters. We have still had to work very hard to make sure their primary nationality is updated to the other EU one in various systems.

 

This is a massive headache

Are you and your wife the first multicultural unit in your (broader-) family history? I'm talking going back 2-3 generations max, here.

 

If you are, I (may) have news: things never change in that respect (ostracizing, victimising to some degree or other); and never less so than when nationalist pressures gain political ascendency and popular legitimacy.

 

I have generations of parents, grandparents and great grandparents (on both sides) whose life history can attest to the fact.

Edited March 27, 2019 by L00b

[Top Cats Hat 10]

11 minutes ago, Sidonica said:

you are trying to please  everybody and that's impossible.

Another advantage of my suggestion is that it would please 54% of the population. 

 

There isn't even a version of leave which will please even the 46% who support leave. None of the leave options commands even 50% of leave supporters and even it it did that would still only please 23% of the population.

 

So remain and please 54% of the population or pick a version of leave that will please at most 23% of the population, damage our economy and lower our standing internationally.

 

The phrase 'no brainer' has never been more appropriate! 😉

[melthebell 863]

Here you go comrade cardoor, THIS shows what twaddle your cod class war nonsense is

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47717397

 

The government has spent $15.9m (£12m) on a luxury apartment in New York for a British diplomat working to negotiate trade deals with the US.

 

couldnt that money have  been spent better here without brexit? maybe on the NHS? or more police? nurses? new school or to cancel the need for food banks?

[woodview 10]

1 hour ago, Top Cats Hat said:

To be fair, the majority of the population (currently estimated at 54%) agree with me.

 

 

I assume you mean 'majority of the electorate' ? I know by your calculations only 3% of the population voted Leave, so I just wanted to be sure.

46 minutes ago, Sidonica said:

As TCH says It would have the largest majority, you are trying to please  everybody and that's impossible.

No, we aren't going to please everybody. A hard Leave is going to upset lots of people and a hard Remain is going to upset lots of people. A solution that minimises the biggest concerns of most people is what I'm talking about. That's also what most people are talking about. Of course there are people on the peripheries who will never be happy unless they get their own way in entirety. I care much less about those people.

[woodview 10]

39 minutes ago, L00b said:

It tells you what you want to hear, certainly 

 

I prefer rule by the rule of law, wherein the law gets written by due process (which means by debating and vote of elected representatives, in a Parlementarian democracy).

 

Where the constitutional framework vests sovereignty in the people itself, like in Ireland, you'd have a point.

 

Where that framework vests sovereignty elsewhere, such as in Parliament in the UK, or Kim Junior in North Korea, you don't.

 

And the due process for changing that state of affair in the UK, is to lobby and influence and vote for Parliament to amend/update the constitutional principles of the UK to vest sovereignty in the British people rather than Parliament.

 

Mob rule is not a democracy, never has been. It's an ochlocracy. A model which you and many fellow Brexiters would be quite content to adopt, from so many earlier posts and that tired cliché of the "will of the people". 

I'm talking about Parliamentarians enacting what has been asked of them. I have no clue what you are calling 'mob rule'.

There was a referendum involving lots of discussion, the result being Leave. Then there was a GE, with the two biggest parties both standing on Leave manifestos. We now have a process in Parliament, where elected representatives are free voting (hopefully) on a range of options.There is no mob rule, there is a perfectly civilised democratic process happening. The fact you don't like the outcome is inconsequential.

I don't know where you've got the idea I don't like democracy from. Lots of my posts, and especially with you, have been voicing my concerns about our reduced voice due to only being 10% ish of the EU. Also, if you can copy and paste a post where I've used the phrase 'will of the people' I'll send £10 to Stronger in Europe.

[Hots on 10]

1 hour ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Then the answer really is very simple.

 

If the country is split down the middle then you go for the option which causes less damage which is to remain in the EU. No second referendum, just a vote to revoke Article 50.

 

Once the fuss has died down and people and government can get back to concentrating on the real issues, this nonsense will soon be forgotten.

 

Job done!

Until of course the EU, with us in it, presses on with the unpalatable things that won't suit this country at all, such as common tax and welfare policies right across all EU member states and an EU army and so on.