General chat room. Pompey related or not, but PLEASE keep it reasonably clean.

Moderators: Kingofstar, lakespfc, Chris_in_LA, Admin, General Mods

By Sam_Brown
#889898
I originally voted to leave and have changed my mind. I’m sure I’m not the only one. I most certainly didn’t want a no deal situation and the deal I did want doesn’t look like it’s possible so if there was another referendum I would vote to remain.
User avatar
By blue architect
#889901
Sam_Brown wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 12:37 am
I originally voted to leave and have changed my mind. I’m sure I’m not the only one. I most certainly didn’t want a no deal situation and the deal I did want doesn’t look like it’s possible so if there was another referendum I would vote to remain.
I am surprised SB that you had the time, patience and skills to go through all the scaremongering, inaccuracies and misinformation to even have an inkling on what deal would be possible. I am suitably impressed. Me - I lost the will to live months ago
By past memories
#889908
Sam_Brown wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 12:37 am
I originally voted to leave and have changed my mind. I’m sure I’m not the only one. I most certainly didn’t want a no deal situation and the deal I did want doesn’t look like it’s possible so if there was another referendum I would vote to remain.
When you voted to leave, it meant just that. It was explained in the book that was sent to every household. It simply said leave was leaving everything.
By Sam_Brown
#889916
I don’t recall getting anything in the post but if that’s what you’re saying it said then fair enough. If you could post a pdf version I’d be happy to read it.

Regardless, if there was another referendum I would vote to remain. This idea that all of a sudden everyone who voted to leave voted for a hard Brexit is just a load of rubbish. I recall several interviews with key brexit figures in the lead up to the referendum stating that getting a good deal would be really easy. It turns out this was a load of bull crap. I’m ashamed I fell for some of the emotive rhetoric and strongly believe the whole thing should be voided in lieu of another referendum.
By Milton End
#889918
past memories wrote:
Sat Jun 01, 2019 12:15 pm
Sam_Brown wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 12:37 am
I originally voted to leave and have changed my mind. I’m sure I’m not the only one. I most certainly didn’t want a no deal situation and the deal I did want doesn’t look like it’s possible so if there was another referendum I would vote to remain.
When you voted to leave, it meant just that. It was explained in the book that was sent to every household. It simply said leave was leaving everything.
And, just as an example, I don't recall anywhere in this 'book' that we would have to pay £39 billion to the European Union settle our debts. That's you and me paying out around £650 per person - including new born kids.

[39 billion divided by a UK population of around 60 million.]



.
By Sam_Brown
#889922
Yeah very true. Apparently we’re not going to pay it according to some of the leavers. I need to remember that one the next time I want to leave my phone contract early.
User avatar
By Locky_McLockface
#889923
Sam_Brown wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:29 am
Yeah very true. Apparently we’re not going to pay it according to some of the leavers. I need to remember that one the next time I want to leave my phone contract early.
We don't pay the negotiated settlement if we leave without a deal.

Let's be quite clear, there were lies, misleadings and deceptions on both sides of the campaign, as there are in all democratic votes. Barack Obama said that we would be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the US if we left, full in the knowledge that he wouldn't be making that decision. Why did he say that? I can only assume it was because David Cameron asked him to, because he thought it would influence people into voting to stay.

Your job, as a rational voting adult, is to pick your way through the minefield, see which bits you believe, which bits you don't, and make your choice accordingly.

Let's also be quite clear about another thing. We are only in the current mess because our politicians have royally cocked-up in the negotiations. And the reason for that is that our parliament have been squinnying about not leaving without a deal, therefore tying one arm behind the negotiators' backs. The one thing that the EU feared most about us leaving is the prospect of a no-deal, and there are 39 billion reasons for that.

"Here we are, M. Barnier, we'd like a deal please, rest assured, we won't leave without one, but we'd like as good a deal as possible, pretty please." - why on Earth do we think we'd get a good deal under those circumstances?

Swap that scenario for "Good morning M. Barnier, this is what we would ideally like, this is what we won't compromise on, anything in-between is acceptable to us, but if we don't get that, you don't get your €39Bn. What're you gonna do?" That's what we should have been saying, and I feel certain that they would have been more generous, shall we say.

Rant Over
User avatar
By Locky_McLockface
#889924
Sam_Brown wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:29 am
Yeah very true. Apparently we’re not going to pay it according to some of the leavers. I need to remember that one the next time I want to leave my phone contract early.
We don't pay the negotiated settlement if we leave without a deal.

Let's be quite clear, there were lies, misleadings and deceptions on both sides of the campaign, as there are in all democratic votes. Barack Obama said that we would be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the US if we left, full in the knowledge that he wouldn't be making that decision. Why did he say that? I can only assume it was because David Cameron asked him to, because he thought it would influence people into voting to stay.

Your job, as a rational voting adult, is to pick your way through the minefield, see which bits you believe, which bits you don't, and make your choice accordingly.

Let's also be quite clear about another thing. Sam, the deal you wanted was most certainly possible, and the only reason we don't have it is because our politicians have royally cocked-up in the negotiations. And the reason for that is that our parliament have been squinnying about not leaving without a deal, therefore tying one arm behind the negotiators' backs. The one thing that the EU feared most about us leaving is the prospect of a no-deal, and there are 39 billion reasons for that.

"Here we are, M. Barnier, we'd like a deal please, rest assured, we won't leave without one, but we'd like as good a deal as possible, pretty please." - why on Earth do we think we'd get a good deal under those circumstances?

Swap that scenario for "Good morning M. Barnier, this is what we would ideally like, this is what we won't compromise on, anything in-between is acceptable to us, but if we don't get that, you don't get your €39Bn. What're you gonna do?" That's what we should have been saying, and I feel certain that they would have been more generous, shall we say.

Rant Over
By Sam_Brown
#889933
I agree with you that May and her predecessors who have tried to negotiate with the EU have been massively ineffective and that the current government and opposition have been very poor.

What I also want to add though is that just as my version of a soft Brexit differed from someone else’s version who perhaps wanted a harder Brexit the same can be said for the politicians. If me and you can’t agree on what Brexit looks like and we both voted to leave then how are the politicians ever going to come to an agreement that would make both you and I happy?

Ultimately the fault is with the referendum and the way the question was asked. There should have been a confirmatory vote agreed before the referendum. That way I believe a deal would have passed in Parliament with MPs safe in in the knowledge it would need to be agreed by the public so if it all went tits up they could be absolved.

Both Farage and Mogg who are some of the most ardent leavers have been on record before the referendum as saying a confirmatory vote would be needed so I don’t know why some think it would be such a bad thing. I would still be happy for mays deal to go before a referendum.

Today’s news about the NHS being on the table with any US trade deals just makes me more adamant than ever that I made a mistake in voting leave. Swapping a decent position at the table in the EU with a subservient position with the US just makes me sick. The fact Trump came out and said this in an interview earlier and May just stood there and took it makes me disgusted that we’ve gone from wanting 350 million pounds a week to go back into the NHS to what now seems to be the NHS being under threat of being picked apart by US medical industry.
By No Shot Sherlock
#889936
And if we leave with 'no deal' does anyone actually believe we won't pay the £39 billion? If we want a trade deal with the EU post Brexit they'll just rinse it from us in return for a "good" trade deal or take it through tariffs on a "bad" deal.
User avatar
By Locky_McLockface
#889940
Sam_Brown wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 6:59 pm
Today’s news about the NHS being on the table with any US trade deals just makes me more adamant than ever that I made a mistake in voting leave. Swapping a decent position at the table in the EU with a subservient position with the US just makes me sick. The fact Trump came out and said this in an interview earlier and May just stood there and took it makes me disgusted that we’ve gone from wanting 350 million pounds a week to go back into the NHS to what now seems to be the NHS being under threat of being picked apart by US medical industry.
Again, it's down to the skills of the negotiator(s). It's imperative that we have certain "Red Lines" beyond which we won't go, and I don't think that anyone, of any political persuasion, would criticise the government (of whichever political persuasion) if it walked away from a trade deal with the US if they tried to insist upon having the NHS. Furthermore, it would only be a matter of time until a new Pres is elected, and then negotiations could start again.

I would question us having "a decent position at the table in the EU," there are only 2 decent positions at that table, they are taken by Germany and France. In the longer term, there won't be a table, it will just be the United States of Europe.
No Shot Sherlock wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:38 pm
And if we leave with 'no deal' does anyone actually believe we won't pay the £39 billion? If we want a trade deal with the EU post Brexit they'll just rinse it from us in return for a "good" trade deal or take it through tariffs on a "bad" deal.
If we got a good long-term trade deal, then I don't have a problem with paying the €39bn. In the event of a "bad" deal, again that will hurt Europe more than it hurts us, as we import from them more than we export to them.
By Sam_Brown
#889945
Locky_McLockface wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:04 pm
I would question us having "a decent position at the table in the EU," there are only 2 decent positions at that table, they are taken by Germany and France. In the longer term, there won't be a table, it will just be the United States of Europe.
Well that’s just factually untrue. The UK enjoys a lot of benefits that other countries do not. The power to veto being a key one.

And you talk of red lines but let us remember it was mays red lines and inability to compromise that contributed caused to us to have such a crappy deal negotiated with the EU.
User avatar
By Locky_McLockface
#889959
Sam_Brown wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 6:42 pm
Locky_McLockface wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:04 pm
I would question us having "a decent position at the table in the EU," there are only 2 decent positions at that table, they are taken by Germany and France. In the longer term, there won't be a table, it will just be the United States of Europe.
Well that’s just factually untrue. The UK enjoys a lot of benefits that other countries do not. The power to veto being a key one.

And you talk of red lines but let us remember it was mays red lines and inability to compromise that contributed caused to us to have such a crappy deal negotiated with the EU.
Depends upon your definition of decent.

The Red Lines are those requirements upon which you state that you won't compromise. When you negotiate to buy a house, you have the price that you would like to pay (your first offer), and the maximum that you are able to pay - the latter is your Red Line. You cannot compromise that. What you compromise on is your ideal price, and you come out somewhere between the two.
By Sam_Brown
#889964
I don’t disagree with any of that :thumb.
User avatar
By Locky_McLockface
#889972
I feel dirty this morning. I watched Question Time last night, and found myself agreeing with Piers Morgan!!!!! I'm sorry, I shall self-flagellate with a willow branch.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
How blue are you?

Being 8000 miles away, I don't go these days and h[…]

Jackett and Wolves...Deja Vu?!

1969 wow, I can understand why promotion this ye[…]

Mother.

Week 13 latest and result thread

HTH table P W D L F A GD Pts That's Rich 8 6 0 2[…]