When debating remainers

But we have been here before and as it was pointed out you refused to answer lord knows how many times. It was your hypothesis that from 1973-2015, companies that made any redundancy or closures were simply experiencing a hard market and the EU was in noway to blame. But anything negative from 2016 onwards are experiencing the negative impact of Brexit and would have survived just fine if we had voted to remain? It's a theory for the birds Vinny, totally absent from any consistent logic.

Now explain to me how supermarkets with such a slim profit margin in a highly competitive market, can for years continue to buy and sell products at a price with the pound losing its value but 3 years on, they can't afford to? That's nothing to do with stock holding, I know that that's my job, warehouse and logics in the food industry.

So how can you prove, when Brexit and taffifs have not yet happened, how do you prove everything on negative on Brexit while any positive news has nothing to do with Brexit? In particular Because being in the EU didn't save those industries and business at any point since we joined.

Pound has dropped by 15% in 3 years and shock horror, some prices have gone up. Is it really that hard?

You will be telling me black is white next.

I'm not so sure about the Canada deal harming anything, I don't see how it can however I do not have a subscription to FT so I cannot see you're link..

There is literally no point in leaving the European Union to become a zombie member. As remainers correctly point out deal wise we go from the most privileged member to a non member with no vote/influence but we still are shackled to the failings of the EU, crazy idea. The Canada deal which may squashed was the ideal Brexit it gave us our freedoms to self regulatate, choose which regulations to keep and which to improved or discard based on our own needs answerable to the British electoral system

10% of Parliament hell bent in remaining is debateable at best. If we are talking about what should of been done. Before we A50 was triggered we should have had indicative votes as to what to do, personally I don't understand why someone would vote for A50 when they clearly don't understand it!

Brexit has become a colt/belief from both sides, some remainers think the sun comes from Brussels and some leavers want to leave and have became equally deluded thinking the empire will magically return.. We will not agree because ultimately the difference between leavers and remainers is a leavers see opportunities and remainers see damage limitation.

However just strike a hand of agreement the great man in your picture, undoubtedly in my eyes the greatest political figure to of never became PM is my polical hero, I'm guessing yours also he would certainly see opportunities but I would also think he would be pround that we both are standing up for what we both believe in.

Oh dear... same old circular argument. We were a powerhouse in the 60's but hit a slump in the 70's thanks to worker's rights... etc. We were on our knees... I was there. Electricity provided 4 days per week if lucky, before your time. Saving grace was the EU... 1976, gave us access to markets previously inaccessible. We were and are good at what we do but even we need customers! Onwards and upwards! London doubled in size, became a financial powerhouse... These Brits know what they're doing... invest, invest! By 2000 we had money coming out of our ears but then... gulf war, a 3 month skirmish at worst... wrong! Led to the 2008 recession and we were spent up... again. Then Cameron... austerity, austerity, austerity... only way back. Then we decide to punch him on the nose and stick up two fingers to those who helped us out of the ****. I'm sure this is not how UKIP monthly tells it... but it is how my memory does, I was there. I trust it more than UKIP monthly.

Agree with much of this. We had an incredible deal from the EU - all of the privileges without many of the drawbacks; vetos in key areas, non-schengen, non-Euro, rebate which amounts to nearly 50% of our contributions etc. The link gave a brief overview of the Canada deal and outlined why it probably won't suit our relationship with the EU - based on the level of integration we currently have and the size of our service sector - hence it being the second-worst outcome in terms of GDP lost (second only to no deal).



Again, agree with much of this. Indicative votes from the beginning - this would have allowed the government to gauge the mood of Parliament - streamlining the entire process, changing the negotiating position of the government, increasing the likelihood of a deal being passed; ergo avoiding no deal. Maybe that's an over simplistic analysis, but indicative votes certainly would have been beneficial from the outset.



Indeed! What a guy he was. A little before my time - but his ideas resonate now more than ever

Here we go reference my post #7

You really need too look up the definition of bigoted/bigot and then you may wish to veiw yourself.

Whoosh. I was obviously being serious lol.

You certainly don't appear to be able to grasp the concept of market forces.
I have already acknowledged that the price rises were partly down to the drop in the value of the pound but for you to continue to try to assert it is that alone is both wrong and naive, and to think that there are those among you that claim we leavers aren't informed enough.

Yes, I've already sent apologies above. It's not the first time I've been wrong and won't be the last

You should get into politics... oops... I talked crap!

Not hard at all...yet. The minefield is still to come. Loved Boris' speech... same one he gave in 2016. Was ******** then too but we so quickly forget.

How long can you more deluded remainers kick this minefield down the road, it was meant to happen as soon as we voted to leave.