The Brexit Arms. Please drink ( & post ) responsibly.

[surferjet]

• torrid = tories - quite an apt substitution in this case.

Teresa May's trews are a hot topic on the Westminsterender's thread at the mo - apparently they send out the wrong message

I was quoted Infinite - that was my comment on the other thread Love the T shirt idea

Yes saw mention of them on Andrew Marr this am. The guardian Man "thirsty" Owen rolled eyes at them. Its uber important to discuss such heavy weight Brexit matters Wrong. We need to drill down into the apparel of the other MPs, after all a hand made suit can cost thousands and shoes - Church, Lobb etc cost hundreds.

Nice rebuke to Owen over the support of Putin, how he can spit out Trump and Farage so called support for Putin when Corybns is courting controversy for the same thing....bonkers, blind, what? Self deluded? Having said that - watching OS blathering as usual, it doesn't surprise me how some of his readers become so confused!

"Wrong Trouser" I missed that sorry slow this am very apt.

What I mean is pretty much what Kaija said above. I believe that leaving the single market will be very damaging to our economy and GDP will go down as our debt rises.

So you were specifically referring to a 'hard Brexit' then?
What is your view on a 'soft brexit'?

As a result public services will come under more and more pressure as less money is available to fund them.
This suits the torrid agenda of reducing benefits and privatising the NHS.

As we've just learned with the McDonald's thing, the reduction in Corporation Tax is proving to be an enticement for multi-national big business to view uk as an attractive option.
If this continues, then tax receipts will increase - ergo more money available.

Yes some people will gain from this scenario but I think only the super rich who have the flexibility to ride it out and indeed make money out of the effects e.g. Increased volatility in the stock markets/currency markets.

Yes, the super rich will come out better off - but they invariably do. Take them out of the equation as that's a given.
Who will be 'worse off', and how? Specifically?

For the average family though, I can't see how it can be good news?

You can't see how leaving the EU will be good news?
Not at all?
Turn that round - how will remaining in the EU be good news?
Good news re leaving: autonomy, sovereignty, no longer part of a failing project, no longer responsible for bailing out the economies of other failing countries, ability to control immigration, no more Great White Fortress of Europe, etc etc.

'Average families' are not just driven by their pay packet - they also are able to contemplate the bigger picture.

You can't see how leaving the EU will be good news?
Not at all?
Turn that round - how will remaining in the EU be good news?

Yes ^ 100%

I would prefer no Bexit at all and think our current arrangement is the best deal we can get. However, in my opinion a hard Brexit will be most damaging for the reasons I gave above. A softer Brexit with tariff free access to the single market would therefor be less damaging to the economy so preferable in my opinion. But no where near as good as our current deal.

With regard to Macdonalds, I'm not sure Turing ourselves into a tax haven is a good thing. My DH had his own limited company, so lower corporation tax will benefit us personally but will obviously raise less in tax revenue for funding public services. I thought people were angry with companies avoiding tax and can only see this worsening.

As I said above, I think it will be average families who are worse off. The defect is now forecast to grow and not be paid off by 2020 as was previously expected. So austerity will have to continue causing the cuts in public services/benefits I mentioned above.

I can't really see Brexit having much effect on immigration either. The figures recently released I think showed the government's target was 100,000 and net immigration was 500,000. Yet immigration from outside the EU was, from memory half of that, so 250,000. This immigration from outside the EU was supposed to be entirely controllable, so why wasn't it controlled? I also believe that trade deals with other non-EU countries will require us to agree to more immigration.

Re sovereignty - that's interesting - lots of Brexiteers don't seem to be enjoying seeing sovereignty in action with the challenge to TM using royal prerogative.

Re bail outs - we, as a non-Euro state did not have to bail Greece out. We did contribute to a bail out of Ireland but as a member of the IMF and not the EU. the EU agreed that non-euro currency members would not have to bailout Euro members.
www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/36456277?client=safari

Thank you for answering

I'm (personally) ok with the tax haven thing, so long as it's an above board tax haven thing - that is, low corporation tax as an inducement to some big companies choosing to base themselves here.

Wrt the deficit & forecasts, they are forecasts - no one actually knows what will happen.
The forecasts may be overly pessimistic, but also overly optimistic too.
However, with less money leaving the country (we were net contributors to the EU after all), and more money coming in - McDonald's, maybe more? Who knows? - that's no bad thing.

Wrt immigration - we need immigration, immigration is good.
I would prefer (personally) to not be in a position where we prioritise EU citizens over other people - however, either way it is preferable to be able to decide for ourselves when brakes are necessary or not.

Wrt sovereignty, it is one of my main drivers.
Why do you think though that Brexiters are pissed off about the legal challenges?
Seriously?
Has it never occurred to you that they're pissed off because they're not stupid?
They know that the cases were not brought because Gina Miller was genuinely concerned that a legal point may have been misinterpreted - she and her team were simply trying to challenge Brexit as a whole.

Wrt bailouts, yes you're right, sorry.
That was part of Cameron's pre Ref deal.

. This immigration from outside the EU was supposed to be entirely controllable, so why wasn't it controlled?

Yes we need more answers on this for sure. I was under the impression that the people from outside the EU who came here would for so many reasons but largely - due to jobs, filling gaps we need? So if we cut that back we are just left with an enormous amount of people who don't have skills we necessarily are actually short of. The other thing to remember is - we cant actually count people from the EU as there is no counting system but we know its a lot. < scientific.

Wrt sovereignty, it is one of my main drivers.
Why do you think though that Brexiters are pissed off about the legal challenges?
Seriously?
Has it never occurred to you that they're pissed off because they're not stupid?
They know that the cases were not brought because Gina Miller was genuinely concerned that a legal point may have been misinterpreted - she and her team were simply trying to challenge Brexit as a whole.

The referendum was badly worded and advisory so it stands to reason that the mechanism by which this country leaves the EU will be challenged. Especially when the Far Right contingent of the Tory party seem to think that they can make unilateral decisions as to what kind of Brexit takes place, without consulting us via our MPs. It is evident that MPs will vote through Article 50, but the government has no mandate to impose its own version of Brexit.

As for Brexiters being pissed off, all that is happening now is that democracy, in its fullest truly sovereign sense, is at work.

Wrt sovereignty, it is one of my main drivers.
Why do you think though that Brexiters are pissed off about the legal challenges?
Seriously?
Has it never occurred to you that they're pissed off because they're not stupid?
They know that the cases were not brought because Gina Miller was genuinely concerned that a legal point may have been misinterpreted - she and her team were simply trying to challenge Brexit as a whole.

That was meant to be in bold.

As for Brexiters being pissed off, all that is happening now is that democracy, in its fullest truly sovereign sense, is at work.

I'm aware of that - in fact I've posted myself that regardless of what 'side' people are on, and regardless of the outcome, I'm proud that we live in a country where it is not just OK to speak out against govt, but it is also part of our system of law to enable you to do more than just speak, but to take action.

However, my point about Brexiters being pissed off was in direct reply to a section of Marmite's post which had the usual implication that being pissed off with the court case was in conflict with wanting sovereignty.
I was pointing out that you can embrace sovereignty and still be pissed off.
Gina Miller etc were not being altruistic and merely concerned over a point of law 'for the good of all', but rather they were making a deliberate play to frustrate the outcome of the referendum - to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

The wording and advisory nature of the referendum is wholly down to all those MPs who voted it through.
The message throughout the ref campaign however, from Remain & Leave MPs alike was that it would be implemented, and that it was a 'once in a lifetime vote'.

Not once during the campaign did Nick Clegg, Tim Farron, Nicola Sturgeon et al say "well of course it's only advisory and as such we will obviously challenge the outcome if Leave win".

mango

I agree with what you are saying

However at no point did anyone say that it would be legally binding

They all twisted the truth or lied...mainly i think so when we remained they could say 'well thats it...that was your chance'

Well that backfired didnt it!!

Wasn't one of the claimants in the high court case on the leave side though? How would this to be to frustrate the outcome of the referendum?

Oh, they all twisted, turned & lied, definitely.
No one is saved from my disgust.

To be fair to Alex Salmond though in one respect - it appears that he challenged the ref bill about needing all countries to be considered.
He apparently was told it didn't matter as it was just advisory.

(For the record, I think Wee Eck is as slippery as the rest, and am not a particular fan - but he at least questioned it at the time).

The Leave win took them all by surprise - mostly because they were so out of touch with their electorate.
Even Nige didn't think he'd win - when the polls closed he made a few noises about it probably being a narrow win for Remain.

I sat and watched the whole night & next day like - I didn't sleep for about 48 hours in the end - I was convinced of a Remain win too, even though I was & am a firm leaver.

Not sure tbh marmite.

I think thats where i went wrong mango

Firm remainer...but i went to bed

Look what happened!

Happened with trump as well...i went to bed

When will i learn that what i do has consequences for the planet

And yes i am bigging up my part in all this

One of the Claimants, along with Gina Miller and others, was Deir Tozetti Dos Santos who voted leave in the EU Referendum vote.

Gina Miller etc were not being altruistic and merely concerned over a point of law 'for the good of all', but rather they were making a deliberate play to frustrate the outcome of the referendum - to suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

I don't think any of us can know anybody's private thoughts. Personally I think Gina Miller has balls and I wish I had half her courage and dignity.

I agree that MPs are at fault for voting for the referendum in the first place, but that still leaves the thorny (long) conversation of exactly how the UK will leave the EU. I personally am glad that people have challenged May's autocratic and jingoistic style of government, and I don't think it really matters what their motivation is. Also, as remainers they will probably continue to campaign for what they believe is in the best interests of this country. Just as leavers will. You could call both altruistic.

And yes i am bigging up my part in all this

Of course!

Because it's all about yooooouuuu!!!!!
(Obvs!)

Personally I think Gina Miller has balls

Agree.
And she absolutely doesn't deserve the personal abuse & crap that she's been getting.

mango

Obvs

Whilst she absolutely doesn't deserve the abuse and opprobrium she is an unpleasant self serving arse whose only intent is to overturn the vote, a vote we all made in good faith that our government would uphold the result. Gina Miller is only interested in getting the result that suits her and her cronies

"Whilst she absolutely doesn't deserve the abuse and opprobrium she is an unpleasant self serving arse"

This is quite funny.

It was meant to be