The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[chrisp65]

5 minutes ago, brommy said:

I'm genuinely reminded of my last house move.

Did you get your neighbours to move as well by promising them £350 million per week?

Without telling them where they were going and what they could take with them?

 

[brommy]

9 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Did you get your neighbours to move as well by promising them £350 million per week?

Without telling them where they were going and what they could take with them?

 

Only after ignoring all the advice that my house move would be a disaster! 

[darrenm]

45 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

interestingly (or not) Homophonic attacks have increased 157% since Brexit (v 41% on Johnny foreigner )  ... it's a worrying trend in both cases , but it would appear too simplistic just to blame it on Brexit

 

I don't think so. The right have been emboldened by brexit.

[bickster]

55 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

interestingly (or not) Homophonic attacks have increased 157% since Brexit (v 41% on Johnny foreigner )  ... it's a worrying trend in both cases , but it would appear too simplistic just to blame it on Brexit

 

Blame it on Brexit... No. Blame it on the campaign of the leave team... yes

They've empowered every wrong thinking dickhead in the country

What was the best indicator of which way a person would vote in the referendum? Their opinion on same sex marriage

[blandy]

1 hour ago, tonyh29 said:

Homophonic attacks have increased 157% since Brexit (v 41% on Johnny foreigner )

That sounds like what I heard, not sure if it meant the same thing though 

[a m ole]

55 minutes ago, brommy said:

Leaving the EU and whatever it entails is going to be a long and difficult journey, but that doesn't mean the journey won't be worth it. What people think of where we eventually get to will be highly subjective, but let's at least get there.

I'm genuinely reminded of my last house move. I thought it was the right decision to move but I couldn't be certain whether I'd like the new area, whether the neighbours would be nice or whether the house would have issues not picked up in the survey. The seller turned out to be a very dodgy character. When I refused to meet his demand for an extra £2000 for the carpets (half of which were royal blue, FFS!), he kept delaying the move. After months and months of hassle with him and his solicitor, the moving day finally arrived. He obviously hadn't cleaned it since my final viewing, some months earlier. The carpets had been removed or damaged, the kitchen was thick with grease and the oven was broken, the showers and toilets were filthy and blocked, all the sink plugs had been ripped off their chains and taken, all the light bulbs had been removed or smashed. The day reduced my wife to tears. It took a lot of hard work, money and a long time to get our new house the way we wanted it. Two of our neighbours weren't that nice so for a couple years it was awkward at times. One of the awkward neighbours moved away after 3 years and the other 'grew up' and is now pretty decent.

If I'd have judged the move after a week of putting the first offer in, or even two years after the actual move, I might have regretted it. After 5 years or so, our house finally felt like our home. It's now 18 years after the somewhat traumatic move it turned out to be one of the best things my wife and I have done for our Villa family. 

I occasionally drive past where I lived 20 years ago; it has gone downhill.

All that hardship was worth it just to get away from the immigrants on your old street, eh?

[brommy]

6 minutes ago, a m ole said:

All that hardship was worth it just to get away from the immigrants on your old street, eh?

Funnily enough, I'd guess the demographic was pretty similar. 

I'm sure you understood my true analogy that premature judgement can be detrimental.

Edited December 12, 2016 by brommy

[StefanAVFC]

Yeah I agree, but the analogy is far too simplistic. It doesn't factor in anything other 'it's too soon to judge'.

[peterms]

12 minutes ago, brommy said:

I'm sure you understood my true analogy that premature judgement can be detrimental.

So you made a decision that you would move, and before you actually moved, you chose a new house, agreed a price you were comfortable with, and arranged the logistics of moving on a date agreed with the vendor, the removals firm, the solicitor, and possibly the new purchaser of your own house?  You didn't select a date to move, commit yourself to that come what may, and then hope that something would turn up that might be acceptable, affordable, and practical?

[brommy]

1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said:

Yeah I agree, but the analogy is far too simplistic. It doesn't factor in anything other 'it's too soon to judge'.

My figure of 10 years or so was based on various factors including the 'Remain' advice that it would take years (7 years was often branded) to establish trade contracts. If one's focus is primarily on economic values, knowing how slow economic patterns are established, it seems reasonable to judge a few years after said trade deals are established. Time will tell whether the possibly associated increase in crime will continue or reduce to it's pre-referendum levels. We can't be sure that a narrow 'remain' result wouldn't have resulted in an immediate knee-jerk reaction or a slowly increasing frustration amongst the apparently increasing numbers who wanted to leave the EU.

[brommy]

20 minutes ago, peterms said:

So you made a decision that you would move, and before you actually moved, you chose a new house, agreed a price you were comfortable with, and arranged the logistics of moving on a date agreed with the vendor, the removals firm, the solicitor, and possibly the new purchaser of your own house?  You didn't select a date to move, commit yourself to that come what may, and then hope that something would turn up that might be acceptable, affordable, and practical?

I did what I was permitted to do before the move. I would have like to have agreed the niceties but the seller refused to play ball. I knew it would be difficult but had belief in my own ability to succeed and make the move worthwhile. A premature judgement might have seen me pull out of the move or decide to move back to where I originally wanted to move away from or, even worse, live in pity and regret. It took a few years before I knew it was worth it. 

[Xann]

Quote

 

I never thought I would get so fascinated with a UK Supreme Court decision, but I watched much of last week’s hearings with an interest which belied the profoundly boring content of the arguments. In addition to teaching us a lot about the UK unwritten constitution, it also demonstrated how constitutionally dysfunctional the UK is and has always been, to the point where the decision to be handed down in January could ultimately lead to Irish reunification, Scottish independence, who knows with Wales, and leaving little England to leave the EU by itself.

The case hinges on two fundamental constitutional questions. First, whether Parliament must legislate to invoke article 50, or whether it can be  unilaterally invoked by the Prime Minister using Royal Prerogative. Second, must the devolved parliaments also give legislative consent to invoke Article 50?

 

IndyRef2

[StefanAVFC]

The content of this is interestingly put, and well written.

Quote

The purpose of the case is to answer two questions. First, whether a notification under Article 50 can be revoked. Second, whether, by leaving the EU, we automatically leave the European Economic Area. 

Let me tell you why they're important.

The first question: can a notification under Article 50 be revoked?

In the referendum we were asked: "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"

But, more than six months on, we still understand little about what leaving the European Union means. Or who is to decide? And on what authority? 

There will be no cake and eating it. 

To leave we will need to make trade-offs between financial contributions to the EU; being inside the largest market in the world which is on our doorstep; whether you and I can live and work throughout Europe; funding the National Health Service; restricting immigration; and having absolute control over our laws. These choices will shape the kind of future our country has. They are - quite obviously - incredibly important. Who is to make these choices? And to what controls should they be subject? 

The answer is complex. Parliament cannot conduct our negotiations with the EU. Only the Government can. But the Government possesses little or no democratic mandate for these choices: there is nothing about them in its Manifesto. So it must be guided by - and accountable to - Parliament. Only Parliament can speak for all of us.

The Government has promised to produce a plan for its Brexit negotiations. And to allow Parliament to scrutinise that plan. The Government says it will then notify the EU (under Article 50) that the UK wishes to begin the formal process of withdrawing from the EU. It will negotiate with the EU a withdrawal agreement and, likely, an agreement shaping our future relationship with our biggest trading partner. But what happens when it returns? How will Parliament hold it to account? 

https://www.crowdjustice.org/case/brexit-for-the-100/

[brommy]

There's an interesting referendum for Northern Ireland! Be incorporated into Ireland or leave the EU?

I think a similar referendum in Wales would lead to them remaining in the UK and leaving the EU.

We might actually get to see Scotland leave the UK and reapply to join the EU, although I think the sizeable minority who voted to leave the EU could increase when they see the EU's terms.

[bickster]

Dont know why Wales keeps getting brought into the independence thing, As a whole they voted to leave the EU

[StefanAVFC]

Wales voting to leave the EU is the very definition of cutting your nose off to spite your face.

They will objectively be worse off outside of the EU.

Oh well, they've taken back control.

[bickster]

3 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Wales voting to leave the EU is the very definition of cutting your nose off to spite your face.

They will objectively be worse off outside of the EU.

Oh well, they've taken back control.

Well that and the extremely clever populous of Sunderland voting to leave when the only thing it has going for it is Nissan who told them all they'd probably have to leave the UK...

[brommy]

I think the majority in Wales that voted to leave would need to be asked what the priority of the factors that influenced their leave vote was before a 'worse' judgement could be made; objective or not.

[mjmooney]

6 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Wales voting to leave the EU is the very definition of cutting your nose off to spite your face.

They will objectively be worse off outside of the EU.

Oh well, they've taken back control.

Well, what can you expect from loquacious, dissemblers, immoral liars, stunted, bigoted, dark, ugly, pugnacious little trolls? *

* (c) A A Gill 

[StefanAVFC]

1 minute ago, brommy said:

I think the majority in Wales that voted to leave would need to be asked what the priority of the factors that influenced their leave vote was before a 'worse' judgement could be made; objective or not.

They will lose £70 a head of EU funding.

I can't see any factor going above that unless it's 'voting leave will provide Wales with £71 a head'.