To think the only people who want 'Nn Deal' have no idea what this means?

[KennDodd]

And don't believe you if you tell them. Facts and laws just seem to be wafted away as irrelevant.

Just curious Mousse! - if I were to say I think many of the problems we face as a society now are bigger than Brexit, but as a result of the death of Christianity in this country, exacerbated by two world wars, and the decline of the nuclear family - what do you think?

You do realise that the Bible teaches that it's perfectly fine for masters to beat their slaves, that women should be stoned to death if they're too afraid to scream for help while being raped, that women have to submit to their husbands even when they're being abused, and that gay people should be executed? Do you really think any of these teachings are good for society?

When Christianity was more prevalent in the UK, how common do you think rape convictions were? What facilities do you think were available for women who were being beaten by their husbands? What do you think life was like for gay people? Or Muslims, or Hindus, or atheists?

I know this might seem off-topic, but I actually think it's relevant to the greater problems that led to Brexit. Nostalgia is very unreliable - people romanticise the good parts and forget the bad ones.

NewName.

you are obviously preaching to the converted here..Problem is that significant damage to the economy does not matter if tou have nothing to lose.

Mandate for Brexit mostly from those safely retired on pensions, or unemployed.

Funny how there seems to be a certain type of pro Brexit poster that pops up and talks about “Southern Ireland” and “Eire”.

Anyone got any good pickled turnip recipes?

And for those who want to believe no deal is a minor blip and we will get past it, we have already been told our daughter’s medication won’t be available if there is no deal as there is no way to import it into the U.K. without an agreement with the EU.

That’s not scaremongering, that’s not project fear, that is the reality of leaving with no deal. It’s harder to get now because of stockpiling and her consultant is currently exploring options which will do the same thing for her and is available elsewhere in the world. I just hope we are able to get enough to withdraw it as slowly as medical advice recommends otherwise a 9 year old girl is going to have a really bad few weeks post Brexit.

Anyone just seen channel 4 news? Asking the father of someone who works at Airbus if he would still vote leave if it meant Airbus up sticks and his son loses his job, he said he would still vote leave
I'm not surprised at all. There was a YouGov poll months ago that asked Leave voters if they would still vote Brexit knowing it would cost a family member there job, most said yes. This number willing to vote leave plummeted when asked they would be willing to sacrifice their own jobs.

New Name. Agree Brexit has been decided by people who have nothing to lose. That is to say on benefits or pensions

That is a seriously bad appeal to emotion that is based on a slippery slope argument that can get very messy with regards to dealing with terrorists.

I am sick of hearing that the high price of Brexit is acceptable, when the reality of what we are talking about is danger of life. This has been admitted by the Health Secretary that he could not guarentee that people would not die in the event of no deal. This isn't holding anyone to ransom. This isn't a game. This is our OWN GOVERNMENT.

This is trying to really drive home the very real risk that No Deal represents and to point that there is an element in the politics of Brexit that is outright militant and prepared to accept that risk, no matter how high and who it affects in its rawest of forms.

We need do need to spell out in no uncertain terms that is what No Deal involves.

This isn't about being pro-Remain or pro-Leave. This is about a shock political event that no deal represents. There are other ways to achieve Brexit, if that is what people desire without this 'high cost'.

The way the whole argument of no deal is being presented is as an incredibly sanistised one, which doesn't represent the human cost of what no deal actually represent.

So yeah, to hell with. Let have it out. Lets hear EXACTLY the mentality we are dealing with here.

Its about time the 'acceptable face' of the polite English well spoken gentleman was shown up for what it is.

smile
your logic is incorrect and goady. Look up cause and effect logic. It may help your critical thinking

My critical thinking is fine, I know all about cause and effect, I can also see that people who post shit like this :

Please come on. Say it.

"I do not mind children being killed in the pursuit and name of Brexit."

SAY IT.

Is some slippery slope appeal to emotion.

But thanks for you valued imput.

Is some slippery slope appeal to emotion.
Ok, you don’t like Smile’s question. I have one. How many children have to face the loss of life altering medication, including the withdrawal symptoms that goes with it. Because that is my reality right now. It’s happening. So, how many is acceptable in the name of change?

@borisbogtrotter

I don't think I am. If Blair and the others really thought we should be in EU, with all it entails, then they should have argued passionately in favour of adopting the euro, and convinced us.

The fact that they didn't is a clear indication that they, and the people were ambivalent to the EU.

The fact that they didn't is a clear indication that they, and the people were ambivalent to the EU.

It is possible to be satisfied with 90% of something but not go the whole hog. The economic conditions for joining the Euro were flawed as many have found to their cost. We were right not to join.

So, how many is acceptable in the name of change?

That sounds a bit close to emotion.

Don’t you know, it’s Wrongy McWrongface to ever appeal to emotion over stone cold rationality and mathematics? If you’re a Remainer, that is.

If Leavers post fact-free sweeps of irrational evidence-free emotion though, that’s not just OK, but evidence of finer sensibilities to be applauded.

It’s one of those irregular verbs

I think whether its goady is a matter of opinion, if the Health Secretary is openly saying that he can not guarentee that no one will die in the event of no deal.

We need to be able to admit there is a risk and be open and honest about how far we are prepared to go with that risk.

It would not be acceptable in any other area of policy making to fail to do a risk assessment of this nature and it wouldn't be politically acceptable to say that we consider that X amount of deaths was an acceptable level for the implementation of that domestic policy on our own citizens.

Yets thats what No Deal Brexit is doing.

Its one thing for it to be a consquence of utter incompentence - gross negligent manslaughter is a crime btw - but what we have is people and politicians advocating it as a deliberate act too.

I am sick of it. Utterly sick of it.

The dodging of wanting to do that risk assessment and quantify it, is a major failure of those entrusted with our safety, security and well being.

I believe about 100 people a year were murdered during the years of the 'troubles' so twenty years of the GRA is thought to have saved 2,000 lives. Maybe that is the 'acceptable' number?

People with pensions and benefits do have plenty to lose they just don't realize it.
If the country becomes poorer there is less money for benefits and the NHS.
If food supplies are disrupted and the value of the pound falls further then food costs more.
If we sign the kind of trade deal that Trump wants then the cost of our medicines goes up and the safety of our imported food goes down.
Just thinking things can't get worse doesn't make it a true fact.

I am sick of hearing that the high price of Brexit is acceptable, when the reality of what we are talking about is danger of life. This has been admitted by the Health Secretary that he could not guarentee that people would not die in the event of no deal. This isn't holding anyone to ransom. This isn't a game. This is our OWN GOVERNMENT.

Ah OK, so the goalposts have shifted somewhat from being about the GFA, I agree its a shit show, but I can't remember that the leave vote was promising immortality, it's the same as he cannot guarantee staying in the EU will guarantee that people will not die.

Shifting the goalposts from the GFA and pretending that leave voters wanted that is very disingenuous, it's like saying Labour voters wanted a million plus to die due to war.

You know you are trying an appeal to emotion and it is not doing the remain side any favours.

It's funny to hear someone arguing like a first year philosophy student. 'Appeal to emotion' gotcha!

The thing is, this isn't a thought experiment. There is a high chance people will die from hold-ups in medical supplies and drugs. Possibly from delayed/more expensive food. Possibly from an escalation in violence in NI. And that is an emotional matter.

We make a cost benefit analysis. Us Remainers are emotional that the cost appears so high and the benefit seems so unlikely, ephemeral and so far in the imaginary future that the cost isn't close to worth it.

It would not be acceptable in any other area of policy making to fail to do a risk assessment of this nature

Bet it has been done and then hidden away under “fuck me, we need to bury this”.

Ah OK, so the goalposts have shifted somewhat from being about the GFA, I agree its a shit show, but I can't remember that the leave vote was promising immortality, it's the same as he cannot guarantee staying in the EU will guarantee that people will not die.

Er, Brexit is about the GFA and healthcare and just about everything else. The leave campaign suggested a cash boost for the NHS not potential medicine shortages that will endanger lives.

Shifting the goalposts from the GFA and pretending that leave voters wanted that is very disingenuous, it's like saying Labour voters wanted a million plus to die due to war.

This makes no sense whatsoever.

I believe about 100 people a year were murdered during the years of the 'troubles' so twenty years of the GRA is thought to have saved 2,000 lives. Maybe that is the 'acceptable' number?

There is the slippery slope. Swap a few key words there and it becomes some far right rhetoric.

To show how much of a shit show it all is and how people are only listening to one side or the other, Trimble one of the key negotiators disagrees.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/45500214/trimble-brexit-does-not-breach-the-good-friday-agreement

I love how there is an argument that its unfair to use emotive arguments when THE ENTIRE leave campaign was built on emotive arguments.

It's kind of ironic.

Who changed the rules and banned emotive political arguments since 2016? I thought they were the new thing and facts no longer were important?

Personally I think both are important and neither facts nor emotion can be ignored in decision making and the failure to realise that is part of the underlying problem of why we are where we are.