Do you want a second chance?

[Ross the fiddler]

I think we want a 2nd chance downunder!

One side says, "We have a plan" while the other side campaigns with a known blatant lie. Even sends TXT messages to voters to frighten them to not vote for the incumbent party. Now it looks like a hung parliament!

Good one you moron pollies!

EDIT: Does anybody remember the movie, 'Danny Deckchair'?
The useless pollie 'had a plan' in that (not that our PM is useless, just the campaign rhetoric could have been better).

Danny Deckchair - Official Trailer [HD] - YouTube

Danny Deckchair - Official Trailer [HD] - YouTube

Anyhow, here is the ABC's political version of it.

LOTR: The battle for middle ground

[Harold Gough]

[QUOTE=Naughty Nigel;389834]Greek tourism was suffering long before Brexit.

Few people want to holiday in country teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, and with thousands of refugees arriving every week.
/QUOTE]

There is a much stronger deterent to tourist now that early in the Greek financial crisis.

We were hesistant about how depressed the place would be when we went to to north on 2012. I don't know how many massive loans in they were at the time but all seemed normal and a cafe owner said that business level was about normal.

It may be that their situation has been more of a slow burner than we outsiders realise.

Harold

[Ricoh]

Well the mechanisms at play will inevitably lead to a reduction in tourism and the failure to repay the interest on debt, let alone paying the debt down. What's the Troika's response? A further bailout to enable Greece to service the debt with increased austerity as a result - the electorate will surely rebel and reject, or removal from the single currency reverting to the drachma with hyper inflation? And if Greece tumbles, who's next, what confidence will the markets have in the Euro - unless it has a German or French emblem on the currency.
History will record the single currency project as the biggest cock-up in recent history.

[Ricoh]

Whether you like Corbyn or not, he believes in democracy. His democratic right to continue as Labour's leader, and to respect the will of the people meaning no to a second referendum.

I've heard it said by at least one political commentator that Corbyn's intransigence may lead to a break up of the Labour Party with a new party emerging in its wake, led by the gang of 172!

[shenstone]

just to add to the fun this is something I posted elsewhere which I think both sides should be able to align with

Common sense

I have decided to rant about this referendum. Not about the in or out although I have views on that) but the fact that in the last 2 general elections that referendums have been offered as a way to hopefully buy the votes of undecided voters and the cost and chaos that then ensues

First we had Scotland independence and then the EU vote, and you have to ask yourself who has made money and apparent status from these and what have we really gained

The first is marketing people and journalists, spin-doctors and political pundits. Lots of easy money to be had from soundbites and headlines, the more lurid the poster or headline the better. Plenty more easy money to be had from appearance fees and expenses as well I am sure

The second is of course the politicians and but pretty much the same bunch as above. I use the term apparent status because few on any side of the debate have impressed me at all despite how important they think they are

At the end what have we gained from all of this disruption to our lives, not a lot according to both sides on both arguments they basically come down to there being a bunch of politicians sitting somewhere trying to decide things for us.

Recently I was listening to an article about the Common Sense pamphlet written by Thomas Payne and a few themes from that ring true

Payne made a distinction between society and government, arguing that government is a "necessary evil." As society continues to grow, a government becomes necessary in order to promote civil society through laws and account for the impossibility of all people meeting centrally to make laws

So we need some politicians, but we have too many in the UK already what with councils, assemblies and parliaments no one can really see the difference since we added the scots and welsh parliaments, it’s just more jobs for the 4 groups mentioned above Then we come back to referenda the money that must have gone into the pockets of those groups and closely allied groups must be massive

In the end we all get the stress and the uncertainty and whatever side you are on you must feel that and do we need that in our lives? Surely not.

So here is my proposal

Lets agree these decisions are made for the long term – at least a generation (about 25 years) not maybe we can consider ½ a lifetime so people only have this type of stress once in their lives (current UK average about 80 years so a 40 year lock-in).

Big decisions like this should be planned well ahead so maybe a minimum 5 years between calling them and the vote - plenty of time for people to get past the soundbites

Lets stop Politicians offering referendums to buy votes. If you put it in your manifesto then your party should expect to pay for the resulting costs not us tax payers

Lets do this with fewer politicians can anyone REALLY tell the benefit of so many levels, and remember we are paying for them all. So we need some politicians, but we have too many in the UK already what with councils, assemblies and parliaments no one can really see the difference since we added the scots and welsh parliaments, it’s just more jobs for the groups mentioned above

‪#‎NoMoreReferendums‬ ‪#‎ditchtheassemblies‬ ‪#‎stopbuyingvotes‬ ‪#‎Ivehadenoughofpolitics‬ ‪#‎politicsisnolife‬

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Sense_(pamphlet)

https://en.wikipedia.org/…/List_of_countries_by_life_expect…

https://www.lovemoney.com/…/brexit-eu-referendum-in-out-cam…

http://www.heraldscotland.com/…/13195426.Cost_of_Scottish_…/


http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=3537

[Harold Gough]

Originally Posted by Ricoh

Whether you like Corbyn or not, he believes in democracy. His democratic right to continue as Labour's leader, and to respect the will of the people meaning no to a second referendum.

I've heard it said by at least one political commentator that Corbyn's intransigence may lead to a break up of the Labour Party with a new party emerging in its wake, led by the gang of 172!

Did they elect him to just shadow the Prime Minister or to also lead his party? If he cannot appoint a team who will support him then he is redundant as leader.

Harold

[Ricoh]

I agree with you on burgeoning governance, so logically that should mean an end to Brussels and Strasbourg ? An end to the EU.

[Zuiko]

I was talking to a close friend last night and she admitted that she had voted for Brexit mainly because of the £350 million per week extra for the NHS, but also because of the promise to curb migration from the EU. Now that one has been exposed as a cynical lie and the other looks increasingly unlikely if we are to negotiate a trade deal, she wants her vote back. If a second referendum was held now, she would definitely vote to remain in the EU. But it's too late, isn't it?

Or is it?

Surely if there is the slightest doubt that the democratic process may have been unfairly influenced by false claims about fundamental policy of one of the campaign groups, it is imperative to hold a second vote to validate the result of the first. I feel that an important principle is at stake here, much more important than the side issue of whether or not we remain in the EU. This is a pivotal moment in our history and we have the choice of upholding the veracity and honour of our cherished democracy or allowing it to be prostituted as a cloak of respectability by those who would undermine its true value for the sake of personal gain and hidden agendas.

[Ricoh]

The 350 mentioned was understood by most to mean our gross contribution, was it not?

Immigration is a major issue for the uk - 350k per annum is far too high, the infrastructure can't cope, can it? Ok, build more houses, more schools, more hospitals - really?

An ever increasing population will lead to social unrest - that's a given. Don't believe the 'do gooders'.

[Harold Gough]

Originally Posted by Ricoh

I agree with you on burgeoning governance, so logically that should mean an end to Brussels and Strasbourg ? An end to the EU.

You could dump Strasbourg and the whole thing would function better and less expensively.

If the EU ceases to exist, it would most likely be replaced by a free trade area, which would be a very good thing for all of us.

Harold

[DerekW]

Regardless of any formal immigration controls being imposed by being outside the EU, the future of the UK outside the EU could be so dire that all the immigrants return home and there would be massed unemployment as many businesses close down.

Dark days ahead chaps.

[Zuiko]

Originally Posted by Ricoh

The 350 mentioned was understood by most to mean our gross contribution, was it not?

Immigration is a major issue for the uk - 350k per annum is far too high, the infrastructure can't cope, can it? Ok, build more houses, more schools, more hospitals - really?

An ever increasing population will lead to social unrest - that's a given. Don't believe the 'do gooders'.

Apparently a significant number of people believed the £350 million pledge and didn't appreciate that the figure was gross. After all, it was written on the side of a bus so it must be right. But what possible motive could the Leave Campaign have for touting the gross figure, other than deliberate deception on a grand scale?

Immigration is high but with an ageing population living longer than ever before we are going to need immigrants to staff the NHS and nursing homes, plus many other jobs. If we sent every EU migrant "home" there wouldn't be enough British workers to fill the vacancies, even if every single unemployed person had the required skills.

I wonder if your jibe at the "do gooders" was in regard to the number of Syrian refugees we are accepting? This figure, of course, is set by David Cameron's Government and is not anything to do with Europe.

Perhaps the real issue is illegal immigrants and we don't seem to have a clue how many there are, mainly because successive governments have failed to provide the resources for effective border control. I find it rather ironic that there could be an increase in illegal immigration upon us leaving the EU, because then France will presumably no longer have an obligation to detain would be immigrants at Calais and the front line will shift to Dover.

[DerekW]

but when the UK becomes worse than France and other EU countries there will be no motive to cross the Channel

[DavyG]

Originally Posted by DerekW

Regardless of any formal immigration controls being imposed by being outside the EU, the future of the UK outside the EU could be so dire that all the immigrants return home and there would be massed unemployment as many businesses close down.

Dark days ahead chaps.

Good to see you're still looking at the positive side of life Derek.

I hope this weekends remembrance services for those who died at the Somme have made you reconsider your desire for war.

As with every crisis, this one will resolve itself.

Please bear in mind that, to date, nothing has materially changed since the referendum, only people's perceptions.

Try looking at your glass again, it may actually be half full.

Dave

[Naughty Nigel]

I see Nigel Farage has now stood down as leader of UKIP - for good it seems this time.

Perhaps he wants to spend time with his German wife before she is deported from the UK.