Jump to content

Beyond Brexit - A new dawn? A leap of faith?


Aussie Rules
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Howjy04 said:

I’m just about to pay the £4300 balance of my holiday bill.You know,the £4300 every household would be worse off is we left the EU .We have decided to go jumping off cliff edges this year along with the doom filled remainiacs.I have had the foresight to invest in paragliding equipment.I wonder if they have?

Don't forget to invest in a crash helmet as well Howjy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


19 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

Nothing to do with the side of a bus which was the topic

no it isn't, but we were discussing the word principle, which you used in your answer, ie "even then the precise amount does not matter, it is the principle that matters".

19 hours ago, Fosse69 said:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Davebrad said:

no it isn't, but we were discussing the word principle, which you used in your answer, ie "even then the precise amount does not matter, it is the principle that matters".

 

Whether a con is a lie or a deception? The Godfather has cleared it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Howjy04 said:

I’m just about to pay the £4300 balance of my holiday bill.You know,the £4300 every household would be worse off is we left the EU .We have decided to go jumping off cliff edges this year along with the doom filled remainiacs.I have had the foresight to invest in paragliding equipment.I wonder if they have?

Hi Howjy.

A reminder that we are still in a transition period, and literally nothing has changed regarding our relationship with the EU apart from we are no longer EU members in name.

Thats why nothing has changed so far, because literally nothing concrete in terms of trade and economics has altered, and will not alter, until the end the calendar year 2020.

Therefore, the smug claims that 'doom filled remainiacs got another prediction wrong!!!' doesn't stand up, as the conditions which their economic forecasts are to be tested against (when we alter our economic relationship with the EU) has yet to come into being yet.

Obviously, if we drastically alter our economic relationship with the EU, and the economy does not suffer, I'll happily return and tip my hat to you.

Hope this helps.

 

Edited by Joe B
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


31 minutes ago, Joe B said:

Hi Howjy.

A reminder that we are still in a transition period, and literally nothing has changed regarding our relationship with the EU apart from we are no longer EU members in name.

Thats why nothing has changed so far, because literally nothing concrete in terms of trade and economics has altered, and will not alter, until the end the calendar year 2020.

Therefore, the smug claims that 'doom filled remainiacs got another prediction wrong!!!' doesn't stand up, as the conditions which their economic forecasts are to be tested against (when we alter our economic relationship with the EU) has yet to come into being yet.

Obviously, if we drastically alter our economic relationship with the EU, and the economy does not suffer, I'll happily return and tip my hat to you.

Hope this helps.

 

It was a post said in jest,Joe.Pages of ‘it was a lie’ can be countered by the same towards some of the remain camp.I,like most,cannot see into the future and anyone who says they can is  delusional,What is for sure is we don’t have to shell out to the EU, in the future.Whether that is a good thing or not we will have to wait,as you hinted at.

I voted to remain but the world is now our lobster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, For Us All said:

The High Court said it wasn't.

Who should I believe?

The High Court didn't say that at all.  It said that using misleading statements in politcal campaigning was normal and did not amount to misconduct in public office which is what the charge was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jacko51 said:

The High Court didn't say that at all.  It said that using misleading statements in politcal campaigning was normal and did not amount to misconduct in public office which is what the charge was.

Thank god for some sanity on here. I pointed out at the time that the Court was not examining whether or not it was a lie. They presumed that it probably was. But that wasn't the point. It was all about misconduct in public office and as most politicians, to a lesser or greater extent, tell porkies, they did not want to venture into the realms of politicians' lying and make them into criminal offences, thereby opening a can of worms and making a precedent that would probably be unworkable. It had nothing to do with the £350 million not being a lie.

That's the problem on here. Facts don't matter. 

Here's an idea. Let's deal in factual reality and not make it up as we go along. Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, The_godfather said:

He's not arguing it's not a lie, he knows full well what it is. A clever use of language that separates 2 different things into individual sentences but makes them seem linked together. As individual sentences they can be both perfectly true, but throw them together, and they form a gross distortion. It's a classic tactic that is in use widely at the moment that is just not called out enough.

As a non-government agency, even with prominent politicians in front, there was never any chance that it would happen, but it never needed to be; it wasn't a commitment in any way. It was just deliberately thrown out there to give the impression it could.

It just underscores the fact that there was never a coherent plan for the people that came up with this, other than naked personal ambition. It's the malignant agendas of others that are linked in the background that people need to dig out.

But that's not the point GF.

In pages gone by, Regal argued/claimed/posted the 350m/week was the actual figure the UK paid to the EU, he claimed there was evidence in an EU document and post Brexit this 350m/week would be paid to the NHS.  Regal was asked to post his evidence but never did citing a number of excuses.

The facts detailed in the UK ONS document show that the  350m/week to the EU was a "Theoretical Figure" from both a UK and EU standpoint so now  Regal has changed his story.

The UK never paid 350m/week to the NHS, the statement on the side of the bus was misleading. The only way 350m was available to the NHS post Brexit was if the UK Government contributed additional funds to the money not sent to the EU once the UK had finally left..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Howjy04 said:

I’m just about to pay the £4300 balance of my holiday bill.You know,the £4300 every household would be worse off is we left the EU .We have decided to go jumping off cliff edges this year along with the doom filled remainiacs.I have had the foresight to invest in paragliding equipment.I wonder if they have?

Howjy, In jest, you're worse off if your holiday is in the USA and also probably if it's in the EU as  the pound is much lower, certainly vs dollar, than it was before all this Brexit stuff started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


13 minutes ago, Paul6754 said:

Howjy, In jest, you're worse off if your holiday is in the USA and also probably if it's in the EU as  the pound is much lower, certainly vs dollar, than it was before all this Brexit stuff started.

Seattle and Alaska,Paul.Compensated by gold investment, the safe haven.😉I may go gold panning in the Yukon mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 25/02/2020 at 20:36, Jacko51 said:

Beagle has finally cracked with that last post. 

Haha, I'll take that as a compliment from you Jacko. As with the assessment of Priti Patel's performance so far. If it's getting this sort of reaction from people like you, count me in.

On 25/02/2020 at 19:22, tommytunstall said:

Sorry RB it was a downright deliberate lie, you must be deluded to think otherwise 

Sorry Tommy, you are completely wrong and I think you are deluded if you think otherwise.

On 26/02/2020 at 02:04, The_godfather said:

He's not arguing it's not a lie, he knows full well what it is. A clever use of language that separates 2 different things into individual sentences but makes them seem linked together. As individual sentences they can be both perfectly true, but throw them together, and they form a gross distortion. It's a classic tactic that is in use widely at the moment that is just not called out enough.

As a non-government agency, even with prominent politicians in front, there was never any chance that it would happen, but it never needed to be; it wasn't a commitment in any way. It was just deliberately thrown out there to give the impression it could.

It just underscores the fact that there was never a coherent plan for the people that came up with this, other than naked personal ambition. It's the malignant agendas of others that are linked in the background that people need to dig out.

I am arguing it's not a lie. I'm surprised you didn't get that from my posts? 😂😂😂😂

 

Although having thought about it, considering it's determined as 100% factual, I suppose I'm not really arguing any more.

On 26/02/2020 at 13:37, For Us All said:

The High Court said it wasn't.

Who should I believe?

Don't believe the ONS, the EU or the High Court. Believe OVF's remainer corps. Just don't expect any evidence to back up their claim and don't even expect them to explain WHY they think it's a lie. They'll just assert that it is and start calling you names....

...You fascist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 26/02/2020 at 19:59, Paul6754 said:

But that's not the point GF.

In pages gone by, Regal argued/claimed/posted the 350m/week was the actual figure the UK paid to the EU, he claimed there was evidence in an EU document and post Brexit this 350m/week would be paid to the NHS.  Regal was asked to post his evidence but never did citing a number of excuses.

The facts detailed in the UK ONS document show that the  350m/week to the EU was a "Theoretical Figure" from both a UK and EU standpoint so now  Regal has changed his story.

The UK never paid 350m/week to the NHS, the statement on the side of the bus was misleading. The only way 350m was available to the NHS post Brexit was if the UK Government contributed additional funds to the money not sent to the EU once the UK had finally left..

 

Paul, even the other remainers on here admit that the GROSS figure is £350m.

 

That figure is literally not up for debate due to the conclusive evidence.

 

And yet again, you yourself seem to agree with me in the past paragrapgh. The £350m figure is made up of around £211m net and £140m REBATE which has to be spent on EU approved projects. The £211m net COULD go to the NHS. We also get free reign over where we spend the £140m, meaning that, potentially, we could increase spending in the NHS by £350m a week as a direct consequence of leaving the EU.

 

You seem to think that the £140m doesn't exist. It does. It just doesn't get physically transferred to the EU bank account and back again.

 

I cannot believe we're still debating this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

Paul, even the other remainers on here admit that the GROSS figure is £350m.

Even the UK ONS didn't call the 350m/week a "Gross Figure", they termed it a "Theorical Liability", it was an intangible amount of money which was never available to the NHS. It was a lie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


3 hours ago, Paul6754 said:

Even the UK ONS didn't call the 350m/week a "Gross Figure", they termed it a "Theorical Liability", it was an intangible amount of money which was never available to the NHS. It was a lie.

The government could allocate all the theoretical liability and more to the NHS,  if it chose to do so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the meantime we are planning to have another 50,000 customs officers - to cope with the increase in bureaucracy, red tape, paperwork and delays, when checks and barriers and form filling go through the roof next year. 

We won't have much money left for the NHS after we've done all that!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, geosname said:

The government could allocate all the theoretical liability and more to the NHS,  if it chose to do so.

I said the same a few posts ago but that wouldn't be money that was going to the EU as part of the 350m/week, it would be additional funds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Admin don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking. Please report posts and we'll act on ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please use the contact form

    If you can't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Follow the link, type in their username and save - Click here

    Check with admin if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first - Contact us here

  • Friends of OVF




×
×
  • Create New...