QOTW: How do you feel after the EU referendum?

[Corky34]

Do I need to explain the difference between the terms 'Let's' and 'We Will'?

Not from a grammatical or legal sense no you don't, however ask yourself this, if that was an nonpolitical advertisement do you think the Advertising Standards Authority would allow it?
Or do you think they'd investigate it for being misleading, something they don't have the power to do as political advertising doesn’t fall within their remit.

[TooNice]

One thing I've come to realise, is that there is a need for regulation in political campaigns. Those found guilty of making misleading, or utterly impossible pledges need to be taken to court, fined, and we can give that money to the NHS.

[LSG501]

you do realise that the non eu migration, is higher than the eu migration is?

Thats not what the UK is reporting on it's migration statistics site.

Also we do have set limits for a lot of countries outside of the EU so there are restrictions in places, whether they are high enough is another matter.

[Percy1983]

It's not ambiguous, Percy. Come on.

We had more of this kind of definitive shenanigans last week with Gove's PM bid, that he would spend "£100m more on the NHS". £100m more than *what*, he declined to say.

No, but you do need to understand that implying you'll do a thing, i.e. being responsible for putting that thought into people's heads, and then afterwards falling back on your cleverly worded message to say 'we didn't actually say that, actually, if you look at my words' is utterly cowardly and disreputable.

I don't see how else they could have argued apart from presenting possibilities.

What your saying is they could only argue things they could do, but as Boris/Farage are not the government they have to power to implement nothing.

I suppose my point is I voted based on possibilities and not a definitive what will be, I see nothing wrong talking about such possibilities while promoting the cause for leaving.

[wazzickle]

Except £350M was never a possibility, because that figure was not the amount we sent to the EU, and they knew it.

[Percy1983]

Ok take rounding out it was a bit shorter, I accept money does come back but I can put this another way.

You want to be a member of my club, every £50 you each I take £20 off you and give you £10 back and tell you what your allowed to spend it on, so you have £30 with a controlled £10, out of my club you have a straight £50 to spend how you like.

You want to join?

[Gerrard]

What gets me is why use a figure that was definitely misleading. If they had put £100m a week net loss (I assume that is closer to the actual figure ignoring the secondary benefits), then it would have been less easy to dismiss and would have still looked "good" on posters.

[Corky34]

Thats not what the UK is reporting on it's migration statistics site.

What UK migration statistics site says that? The ONS whose the officially recognised statistics authority for the UK government estimates immigration for EU citizens was 270,000 at the end of May 2016 while immigration of non-EU citizens was 277,000. (Net migration of EU citizens was estimated to be 184,000 while non-EU net migration was 188,000)

You want to join?

Depends what other benefits this club of yours offers, are you going to lay on free tea and biscuits.

[TooNice]

Agreed with Gerrard.

You want to join?

Since we are talking about money here, we have to look at the whole economic argument of being in the EU (or at the very least the single market).

Membership has been estimated to worth 31bn to 92bn a year to the UK. Even taking the lower estimate of 31bn, it's still close to 600m per weak. Way more than the 350M week in membership fee even without rebate.
And even if we assume that the 31bn figure is still hugely inflated (though I've yet to see anyone disputing it), halving it would -still- provide parity after rebate on the 350M.
Now sure, it is not the only price we pay for access to the single market. Leavers will quickly point at the freedom of movements. Yet European migrants are overall net contributors, so I don't buy it either.

The answer to your own scenario is "it depends". But as far as the UK and the EU is concerned, the economic argument against is weak.

[Percy1983]

Yet European migrants are overall net contributors, so I don't buy it either.

Yes they are, I am not going to argue with that, but what happens when they all get old? the strain on the country is massive, how do we pay for it? more immigration to cover it...

The problem is we keep doing this making each generation a lot bigger than the last to pay for the previous, its basically a pyramid scheme, and all know how they go when the base finally gets to big.

In short as a country we have been living beyond our means for a long time and we keep kicking the can down the road, something has to change.

[The Hand]

I think the real question is "How will you feel after Article 50 is triggered, if it ever is?"

[directhex]

Interesting comment piece here, so much so that Miguel de Icaza retweeted it.

This whole thing is enough of a car crash that we have a #brexit channel on internal company chat. Funnily enough, Miguel isn't in there.

[Oobie-]

This whole thing is enough of a car crash that we have a #brexit channel on internal company chat. Funnily enough, Miguel isn't in there.

Hah, so do we!
People were not happy in my office.

I didnt read through all the posts, and thus apologise if this has been posted:

http://thebrexitplan.com/

Once Article 50 gets invoked, thats when we should actually get worried. If, like me you're a first time buyer this limbo period couldnt be more frustrating.

[Phage]

Much as I enjoy watching the Brexiteers squirming on the hooks if their own petards (I also love mashups)
It's not getting us anywhere is it ? They cannot be swayed because their vote wasn't based on logic. It was mostly on lies, misapprehension and class. The country is measurably poorer, racisism is emboldened, the politicians are eating each other, and the schism in society is enlarged.
Yes. I put this at the feet of Cameron and Johnson. Their Etonian squabbles have ruined this country.

[wazzickle]

Much as I enjoy watching the Brexiteers squirming on the hooks if their own petards (I also love mashups)
It's not getting us anywhere is it ? They cannot be swayed because their vote wasn't based on logic. It was mostly on lies, misapprehension and class. The country is measurably poorer, racisism is emboldened, the politicians are eating each other, and the schism in society is enlarged.
Yes. I put this at the feet of Cameron and Johnson. Their Etonian squabbles have ruined this country.

Well there have been a few brexiteers who have changed tack after the result, mostly because of the realization that the leave campaign was built on lies, but a few brexiteers I know have been a little less entrenched afterwards, so there's still some cause to argue the case, though I will concede that a lot of it is merely venting anger.

Having said that, there are a lot of remainers who are just shrugging their shoulders and accepting the result, which I don't think is the right attitude, and I believe a good number of them can be convinced, leading to a more resolved, united front against the rising cases of racism and xenophobia, not to mention a good push to convince politicians not to push the big red button.

[Phage]

Quite right. I'm hoping for a general election.
It's just that there is little pint in arguing the case with committed Brexiteers. They just get angry. Heh I've seen accusations that it's a Zionist plot !

This article pretty much nails it, and I'm no fan of the Guardian.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...ty-westminster