The UK triggers article 50.

[whichphilosophy]

The people voted for it so they instead of the parties voted for it. A last minute attempt to still push this as an exclusive right of the Europhiliacs in parliament failed. The MPs effectively respect the will of the people. War Criminal Blair, and Major are of course trying to reverse this.

'The people' are not a government, and what they voted for was lying bullshit, as you know. The people now devising policy didn't support the liars at the time, and what they make of 'the people's' verdict is just a guess, like deciding what a drunk meant after ten pints. The British way is to vote for people with a policy, and vote them out if they don't carry it through. This referendum filth is right-wing European crap, as you know

I don't think Tony Benn would have quite agreed with you; and I know George Galloway doesn't. The rise of the (ultra) right wing is a byproduct of EU failures as one country after has gone bankrupt and now run by banks not governments; not even the EU. Anyway with Teresa May's dithering the UK is going to be in the EU for a lot of years yet. However it's time to prepare to cut the cord.

The reason for such a referendum is the parties were also divided on this issue and this was the correct step. The government can therefore say it is of the people.

 

[iolo]

'The people' are not a government, and what they voted for was lying bullshit, as you know. The people now devising policy didn't support the liars at the time, and what they make of 'the people's' verdict is just a guess, like deciding what a drunk meant after ten pints. The British way is to vote for people with a policy, and vote them out if they don't carry it through. This referendum filth is right-wing European crap, as you know

I don't think Tony Benn would have quite agreed with you; and I know George Galloway doesn't. The rise of the (ultra) right wing is a byproduct of EU failures as one country after has gone bankrupt and now run by banks not governments; not even the EU. Anyway with Teresa May's dithering the UK is going to be in the EU for a lot of years yet. However it's time to prepare to cut the cord.

The reason for such a referendum is the parties were also divided on this issue and this was the correct step. The government can therefore say it is of the people.

The old socialist position was that the EU was so irredeemably capitalist that it was a mugs' game for us. That was before the Murdochite dictatorship, as you know.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I don't think Tony Benn would have quite agreed with you; and I know George Galloway doesn't. The rise of the (ultra) right wing is a byproduct of EU failures as one country after has gone bankrupt and now run by banks not governments; not even the EU. Anyway with Teresa May's dithering the UK is going to be in the EU for a lot of years yet. However it's time to prepare to cut the cord.

The reason for such a referendum is the parties were also divided on this issue and this was the correct step. The government can therefore say it is of the people.

The old socialist position was that the EU was so irredeemably capitalist that it was a mugs' game for us. That was before the Murdochite dictatorship, as you know.

I think what we have is an illusion of an EU but the EU seems to be what you say. As each country goes bankrupt the banks take control over their economic policies. The poor bail out the banksters with added austerity. The problem with austerity, people spend less, so less money circulates thus losing more jobs. Then people work for a crust of bread.

Trade between the countries is always okay and there should be easier travel between these places.

 

[Business]

Although I am not a citizen of Great Britain and I don't live in Europe, with all things considered and what I know personally, I think Brexit is a smart decision in the interest of the English people and the decades on the horizon. With what's coming up on a worldwide scale, technologically and socio-politically, I would say this was a mandatory decision. They're going to say, "It was real fun, the Euro thing". Remember I told you so.

 

[bilby]

Although I am not a citizen of Great Britain and I don't live in Europe, with all things considered and what I know personally, I think Brexit is a smart decision in the interest of the English people and the decades on the horizon. With what's coming up on a worldwide scale, technologically and socio-politically, I would say this was a mandatory decision. They're going to say, "It was real fun, the Euro thing". Remember I told you so.

I am a citizen of the United Kingdom, although I haven't lived there for more than 20 years; I have family still there and visit every couple of years.

It's very obvious to me that Brexit is a really truly awful idea. It's a massive change that is STILL not clearly defined, and that was voted for by a very narrow margin in a campaign filled with dreadful lies.

By FAR the strongest correlation between voter choice and a wide range of socioeconomic factors is with education level - people with higher education voted overwhelmingly against Brexit, and those with less education voted strongly in favour.

There is no plan for what post-Brexit Britain will be like; and IMO this needs to be known BEFORE a referendum can reasonably be held.

This is perhaps the least sensible and most harmful decision in British history; with only the chain of poor decisions made in the run up to the American Revolutionary War coming close to being as damaging to British interests - the difference there being that in that case there were winners as well as losers.

Brexit will cause enormous harm to the British, while totally failing to resolve the actual problems that inspired most Leavers to vote for it - most of which originate in Westminster.

It's impossible for me to fully express just how incredibly dumb this is - it's not even actually popular with a majority of British people. Many, like me, were ineligible to vote; many more voted leave because they were told that doing so would free up money for the NHS - a lie that was dropped by the Leave campaign within a few days of the referendum.

This is a truly fucking awful clusterfuck, that has already done great harm to the UK, and could well result in its dissolution.

 

[repoman]

Was there ever an EXPLICIT VOTE to join the EU by the UK either the representatives or the people in a plebscite? Explicit vote in the same way that states joined the United States.

The EU was assembled through bit-by-bit, leapfrogging bureaucratic expansion, or am I wrong?

 

[Juma]

Was there ever an EXPLICIT VOTE to join the EU by the UK either the representatives or the people in a plebscite? Explicit vote in the same way that states joined the United States.

The EU was assembled through bit-by-bit, leapfrogging bureaucratic expansion, or am I wrong?

A referendum was held in 1975 with a 67% vote in favour of membership.

 

[repoman]

Was there ever an EXPLICIT VOTE to join the EU by the UK either the representatives or the people in a plebscite? Explicit vote in the same way that states joined the United States.

The EU was assembled through bit-by-bit, leapfrogging bureaucratic expansion, or am I wrong?

A referendum was held in 1975 with a 67% vote in favour of membership.

Did the definition or scope of what it meant to be in the EU grow over time in a way that could be fairly complained about?

When a region/territory joined the United States they were very clearly going to be a state. Is this similar to the 1975 vote? What happened between 1958 and 1993?

Now one could say that for the US the federal government has greatly consolidated power in a way that is breaking the letter and spirit of the constitution concerning Federalism. The joining states didn't sign up for such a central power. States partially can have grievances about this growing tyranny. If there is no stick of secession the feds have no incentive to share power with the states, the same for the EU.

-------------------------------------

EVEN IF the EU was formed in a way that was not so above board through legalistic, bureaucratic creep leaving the EU can still be a bad move for the UK. But we should be clear about the methods used to form the EU.

 

[faded_Glory]

Was there ever an EXPLICIT VOTE to join the EU by the UK either the representatives or the people in a plebscite? Explicit vote in the same way that states joined the United States.

The EU was assembled through bit-by-bit, leapfrogging bureaucratic expansion, or am I wrong?

The big, fundamental changes in the EU, especially in its legal status and the division of powers between the EU and the member states, are driven by Treaty changes. Think Rome, Maastricht, Lisbon etc.

These Treaties only come into effect after ratification by the individual member states according to whatever procedure is standard in each of these states. In some countries this requires a referendum, in others just parliamentary approval.

So the answer to your question is, yes.

 

[jonatha]

Theresa May calls for snap election

I assume she expects a larger mandate than what she currently has (the Tories are polling at 43% with UKIP at 11%).

 

[iolo]

I assume she expects a larger mandate than what she currently has (the Tories are polling at 43% with UKIP at 11%).

She wouldn't have called it otherwise. With the insane press hysteria against Mr Corby, she thinks she can get a sufficient majority to guard her against lynching when the negotiations show up the Brexit lies. She'll be lucky!

 

[Business]

It's (Brexit) a massive change that is STILL not clearly defined

The United Kingdom is what, 900 years old officially? The EU coalition is 17 years old? I wouldn't say it is a massive change so much as it is a return to the usual way of things. Like a break off the norm, then return right into it.

people with higher education voted overwhelmingly against Brexit, and those with less education voted strongly in favour.

That difference is directly the result of wealthy people (usually intelligent) being separated from the main population. Poor (usually dull) English suffer the majority of the disputes caused with foreigners who freely wander into British territory, a sort of thing that wasn't possible before the EU. The wealthy couldn't care less if their underlings were getting pilfered and pilliaged. That is why that major difference is there. Brexit stands to benefit the lower English classes. The wealthy though I admit, stand to gain quite a lot with the EU.

There is no plan for what post-Brexit Britain will be like; and IMO this needs to be known BEFORE a referendum can reasonably be held.

It's a really simple thing, really. Brexit cuts off anyone without passports and legitimate reasons to enter British territory. I don't think the UK is going to abandon their migrant workforce. There will be a plan for those who left England to work in Deutschland and France and wherever else they went.

I think it's a good decision that will heal cultural damage caused since 2000 in the UK.

 

[bilby]

The United Kingdom is what, 900 years old officially? The EU coalition is 17 years old? I wouldn't say it is a massive change so much as it is a return to the usual way of things. Like a break off the norm, then return right into it.

people with higher education voted overwhelmingly against Brexit, and those with less education voted strongly in favour.

That difference is directly the result of wealthy people (usually intelligent) being separated from the main population. Poor (usually dull) English suffer the majority of the disputes caused with foreigners who freely wander into British territory, a sort of thing that wasn't possible before the EU. The wealthy couldn't care less if their underlings were getting pilfered and pilliaged. That is why that major difference is there. Brexit stands to benefit the the lower English classes. The wealthy though I admit, stand to gain quite a lot with the EU.

There is no plan for what post-Brexit Britain will be like; and IMO this needs to be known BEFORE a referendum can reasonably be held.

It's a really simple thing, really. Brexit cuts off anyone without passports and legitimate reasons to enter British territory. I don't think the UK is going to abandon their migrant workforce. There will be a plan for those who left England to work in Deutschland and France and wherever else they went.

I think it's a good decision that will heal cultural damage caused since 2000 in the UK.

The facts don't support your position. Education correlates strongly with the way people voted; wealth and income do not.

 

[bilby]

So now Britain must choose between the mob of lackwits who have massively fucked up the country beyond all recognition; and the bunch of losers who can't even manage to effectively oppose a mob of lackwits who have massively fucked up the country beyond all recognition.

What a clusterfuck.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The United Kingdom is what, 900 years old officially? The EU coalition is 17 years old? I wouldn't say it is a massive change so much as it is a return to the usual way of things. Like a break off the norm, then return right into it.



That difference is directly the result of wealthy people (usually intelligent) being separated from the main population. Poor (usually dull) English suffer the majority of the disputes caused with foreigners who freely wander into British territory, a sort of thing that wasn't possible before the EU. The wealthy couldn't care less if their underlings were getting pilfered and pilliaged. That is why that major difference is there. Brexit stands to benefit the the lower English classes. The wealthy though I admit, stand to gain quite a lot with the EU.

There is no plan for what post-Brexit Britain will be like; and IMO this needs to be known BEFORE a referendum can reasonably be held.

It's a really simple thing, really. Brexit cuts off anyone without passports and legitimate reasons to enter British territory. I don't think the UK is going to abandon their migrant workforce. There will be a plan for those who left England to work in Deutschland and France and wherever else they went.

I think it's a good decision that will heal cultural damage caused since 2000 in the UK.

The facts don't support your position. Education correlates strongly with the way people voted; wealth and income do not.

A lot of revolutionary Marxists are well educated.

 

[Juma]

A referendum was held in 1975 with a 67% vote in favour of membership.

Did the definition or scope of what it meant to be in the EU grow over time in a way that could be fairly complained about?

When a region/territory joined the United States they were very clearly going to be a state. Is this similar to the 1975 vote? What happened between 1958 and 1993?

Now one could say that for the US the federal government has greatly consolidated power in a way that is breaking the letter and spirit of the constitution concerning Federalism. The joining states didn't sign up for such a central power. States partially can have grievances about this growing tyranny. If there is no stick of secession the feds have no incentive to share power with the states, the same for the EU.

-------------------------------------

EVEN IF the EU was formed in a way that was not so above board through legalistic, bureaucratic creep leaving the EU can still be a bad move for the UK. But we should be clear about the methods used to form the EU.

Yes we should be clear about them. So why are you so vague and insinuating?

 

[Business]

The facts don't support your position.

I thought it was a no-brainer, but
check this out.

Wealth and education are fundamentally linked in the UK. Education is intelligence's best friend.

About them commie bastards...
check this out.

I refuse to surrender to the Marxist teachers hell-bent on destroying our schools

The academics who criticised the coalition's plans for education wrote with reference to Karl Marx

That is great, bastards hate smart people, prefer a circus.

I like capitalism, freedom and all those good things.

 

[bilby]

I thought it was a no-brainer, but
check this out.

Wealth and education are fundamentally linked in the UK. Education is intelligence's best friend.

About them commie bastards...
check this out.

I refuse to surrender to the Marxist teachers hell-bent on destroying our schools

The academics who criticised the coalition's plans for education wrote with reference to Karl Marx

That is great, bastards hate smart people, prefer a circus.

I like capitalism, freedom and all those good things.

That there's a correlation between education level and wealth is not in dispute.

But the fact remains that wealth doesn't correlate well to voting patterns in the Brexit referendum, while education level does.

So you remain wrong about the facts; and have merely shown that you don't understand statistics.

If A correlates with B, and B correlates with C, that doesn't necessarily mean that A correlates with C.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38762034

I don't click on links to the Daily Mail, and I advise that others similarly refrain from doing so, as there is nothing whatsoever to be gained by it, and it provides advertising revenue to an extremely undeserving cause.

 

[Business]

So you remain wrong about the facts; and have merely shown that you don't understand statistics.

I read that BBC article you provided. Graduates vote remain and up the scale they go with the higher they are educated. Remain (with the EU) means anti-Brexit and Leave (the EU) is pro-Brexit, correct? If so, then I would say that if education levels and wealth levels are directly linked (which makes sense), then I would say that I am probably correct and somewhere in there you must have your terminology fussed up.

 

[bilby]

So you remain wrong about the facts; and have merely shown that you don't understand statistics.

I read that BBC article you provided. Graduates vote remain and up the scale they go with the higher they are educated. Remain (with the EU) means anti-Brexit and Leave (the EU) is pro-Brexit, correct? If so, then I would say that if education levels and wealth levels are directly linked (which makes sense), then I would say that I am probably correct and somewhere in there you must have your terminology fussed up.

Education levels and wealth levels are linked; but wealth level is not predictive of voting patterns, while education level IS.

There's nothing wrong with my terminology; you are just making a false assumption about how correlation translates between multiple factors.

You are making an assumption that is contradicted by the evidence.