EDJOHNS wrote:Watched a "Brexit debate" on I think channel 4 last night.
The main argument anyone could put up for staying in was that "We did not vote for a no deal leave". Quite correct. Neither did we vote that we must have a deal to leave. We voted leave.Plain and simple.
How can people use guess work,(yes, predictions are guess work), to project fear, yet ignore actual facts that we know to be true. Do you really want our armed forces to be under the control of the EU with no input from GB in their leadership? Just 1 of the nasty little nuggets being kept quiet so that people do not realise the lengths the EU have gone to to force us to remain.
You do not have a second referendum or an election to get a democratic decision. You act on the first 1 and then, at some point in the future, if you want to you go back to the people and ask if they want to rejoin.
Scream all you like. That is the ONLY democratic way forward. Our MP's were told to get us out and because some of them did not want to leave they have dithered and dallied and brought the country to the point of virtual anarchy with the marches and protest.
As a "point 2" The SNP totally baffle me. They keep saying that Scotland voted to remain and are being ignored. True, a majority did, but they also voted to remain in the UK. If they accept 1 majority why should they expect the majority vote,(which of course was larger if you discount the % from Scotland), to be changed to suit what becomes the minority of the UK? That is simply, yet again as with the rest of the remainders, saying that the minority should rule because "They know best". You don't. You are guessing.
Lots of old stuff coming back here!
I didn’t see the Channel 4 debate, but would imagine the “not voting for No Deal” comments are being made in the context of the current political situation. The concept of anyone voting purely and 100% on only the contents of a ballot paper is just laughable and, frankly, insulting to the intelligence.
Then “predictions are guesswork”! Well, only if you use tealeaves as your sole method of plucking an outcome from thin air.
Predictions (not the Darlo will beat Man Utd 6-0 type), and more-so Forecasts, are methods of using all the available information, data, facts, rules, trends, modelling, etc., in order to come to conclusions on outcomes for future events. We all do this in our own lives, it doesn’t mean it’s guesswork. If these methods are invalid as being suggested, then a huge amount of people across the world must be stealing a living.
In respect of Brexit there are many areas of fact, one of which unequivocally adversely affects this country. If we leave with No Deal we’ll be worse off - and we’ll be worse off because we’ll lose access to frictionless and free trade with 27 of our nearest neighbours because we can no longer reap the benefits of membership, it’s just a plain fact. We’ll also be paying tariffs on tens of thousands of our products exported to the EU and rest of the world, some sector tariffs are huge such as beef and lamb, others like cars are +10%. We have no control over these tariffs on our exports under WTO. We also can’t “take back control from the WTO”, either!
These aren’t predictions or forecasts, they’re just a fact of being outside a mutual group under WTO rules, but they do add much weight to those forecasts which say overall No Deal will be disastrous. Can anyone forecast the exact costs? No, of course not, but it doesn’t make the overall forecast conclusion incorrect.
To state predictions and / or forecasts are “guesswork” really baffles me.
The EU Army rears it’s head again! Veto! We have a veto - and the veto can’t be taken away from us because we’ll . . . veto it! No, we wouldn’t have to join the Euro or Schengen because we have legally binding agreements with the EU which only U.K. can amend.
As for democracy, it’s a process not an event. No-one in their own lives decides a course of action, finds out new information later on to cast doubt on their initial decision (for example, the good deal initially promised turned out to be food and medicines shortages instead), but then still proceed with it even if they had a better alternative. That’s just not critical thinking of any kind and certainly not a requirement for democracy.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk