EA Forums - Banner

Congratulations to the Brexitters!!

Replies

  • KrustyBrand
    15340 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Yes, I agree Nick. It's also time for the media to start being positive too.

    It’s not the media’s job to be positive.

    This is where there is some scaremongering comes from.

    The purpose of objective journalism is (or at least should be, in my view) to provide facts and information to citizens who can then make their own judgment. If you want to call that “scaremongering” then so be it. It should not be the job of journalism to spoon feed the populace bland pleasantries that make them feel good about themselves. Sadly, that species of advocacy journalism is all too common these days.

    I was not talking about spoon feeding, nor did I mention that. I'm was talking about a situation where a vote has been cast, in a legal, binding democratic way. Yes of course people discuss it and argue about it, that's human nature.
    But the media should be rallying round, and don't give me it isn't the medias job to be positive. Because they've done it many times, got the nation together when it's been in turmoil.

    Sorry, but I am indeed going to continue to insist that it is not the media’s job to be positive. Just because some facets of the media have done so before doesn’t somehow validate it as media’s primary purpose or even an important one. This just seems to be a point on which we are in fundamental disagreement — perhaps we should leave it at that.
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    People will lose jobs if these companies decide to leave but there could be a chance of some given the opportunity to relocate to wherever their companies desire.
    The steel industry and the 11,000 people. If it's the Tata situation there are bidders who are interested. A couple are at an advance stage to save the company.

    "Could be" is exactly where the problem lies, there is nothing in place right now to secure our future. It's all very well saying things "could be" good in the future, but this is real people's lives we're talking about, right here TODAY, not in 2020 and beyond. If companies do leave (along with jobs they currently offer), how will millions of people feed their families?

    "Relocate"? Are you suggesting that it's OK if thousands of people can keep their jobs as long as they have the "opportunity" to move elsewhere? Forget their friends, family, hometown etc, they can just "relocate".
    HomerND84 wrote:
    As saying it mill be a wast of money it will be. It cost £142.4 million. So with the current economic climate being bad do you think another £142.4m would be worth it? And if there was another cos someone didn't like that result have another. That would be £427.2m. Don't you think that would be better of spent something better? Why can't people just respect the decision and move on and look to the future.

    I never said a referendum would be a "wast of money", you are making up lies to prove your argument (the second time now). Please get your facts straight - Myself, and the rest of the Remain campaign based our votes on facts. I'm sorry if you don't do the same, but I think it's a pretty big deal.

    I actually said Scotland should have a second referendum because in 2014 they voted to stay in a UK that is not the same UK as it is today - do you understand that? And yes, I do think £142 million is a very small price to pay if it means Scotland can secure it's own future. According to your Leave campaign that's less than we pay the EU in just 3 days (£350 million every 7 days). You keep saying in the future we'll be okay, so what is just 3 days of EU money right? Exactly, peanuts.

    I find it strange that you can talk about the "economic climate being bad" and money being "spent on something better", while excusing potential job losses. That makes no sense and is yet another contradiction.

    What's your stance on France wanting us to protect our own borders meaning an influx of non-EU migrants could flood the UK in the next year because we haven't got strong enough border controls in place right now?
    What's your stance on the potential loss of manual jobs and less homes being built due to investment in the housing sector being halved?

    It's not the first time that companies have offered people to relocate and many have too. Any way it may not come to that. Companies may not leave I just said it as they weren't happy at the brexit.

    Right let me make my statement a bit clear on the waste of money. I was referring to my original post when I said about it being a waste of money. I just missed of my statement. Yeah it may Seem like a small amount of money but considering that we are susposed to be cutting budgets left right and centre then we throw 100s of millions at more referendum then yes it's a waste of money. And that money should be spent better. Maybe that money could go to helping the steel industry or the manual labouring side or whatever.

    The hand over if the borders won't happen over night and if and when it does well be ready for it.
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    I've answered your question so who was you before?
  • jukan00
    2319 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    GnpSasZ.png?
  • FeeFyeFoeFum
    245 posts
    edited June 2016
    if you come out of the Single Market, it would be a disaster for firms like Nissan (Sunderland) as one example. I believe this will ultimately force many large firms like Nissan, Hitachi, and others to re-locate (no choice). Doubtful the EU will be sympathetic in their break-away terms either.

    Just read how the majority of 18-25 year olds feel duped and didn't even realize what they were voting for - scary. I guess that ties to the 'What is the EU?' top Google search over the past few days in the UK.

    To those who voted to leave, what primary reasons drove you to this being the best solution? Curious.

    I voted leave, not because of immigration tbh but because of the EU itself.

    I honestly believe the organisation itself is too large, has too much red tape and baggage and after 50 years is no longer fit for purpose. It needs to be dismantled and then a newer version (if desired) put into place.

    I like the idea of a common market but just not in its current form
  • lynnmckenz82
    2613 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    if you come out of the Single Market, it would be a disaster for firms like Nissan (Sunderland) as one example. I believe this will ultimately force many large firms like Nissan, Hitachi, and others to re-locate (no choice). Doubtful the EU will be sympathetic in their break-away terms either.

    Just read how the majority of 18-25 year olds feel duped and didn't even realize what they were voting for - scary. I guess that ties to the 'What is the EU?' top Google search over the past few days in the UK.

    To those who voted to leave, what primary reasons drove you to this being the best solution? Curious.

    I voted leave, not because of immigration tbh but because of the EU itself.

    I honestly believe the organisation itself is too large, has too much red tape and baggage and after 50 years is no longer fit for purpose. It needs to be dismantled and then a newer version (if desired) put into place.

    I like the idea of a common market but just not in its current form

    50 years?!? Not nearly that long. Maybe you meant 15.
    Imagine there's a signature image here.--Lynn McKenzie
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    if you come out of the Single Market, it would be a disaster for firms like Nissan (Sunderland) as one example. I believe this will ultimately force many large firms like Nissan, Hitachi, and others to re-locate (no choice). Doubtful the EU will be sympathetic in their break-away terms either.

    Just read how the majority of 18-25 year olds feel duped and didn't even realize what they were voting for - scary. I guess that ties to the 'What is the EU?' top Google search over the past few days in the UK.

    To those who voted to leave, what primary reasons drove you to this being the best solution? Curious.

    I voted leave, not because of immigration tbh but because of the EU itself.

    I honestly believe the organisation itself is too large, has too much red tape and baggage and after 50 years is no longer fit for purpose. It needs to be dismantled and then a newer version (if desired) put into place.

    I like the idea of a common market but just not in its current form


    50 years?!? Not nearly that long. Maybe you meant 15.

    We've had a European body that has been around for s long time. We the eu body was created more recent.
  • theslayer369
    2009 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Yes, I agree Nick. It's also time for the media to start being positive too.

    It’s not the media’s job to be positive.

    This is where there is some scaremongering comes from.

    The purpose of objective journalism is (or at least should be, in my view) to provide facts and information to citizens who can then make their own judgment. If you want to call that “scaremongering” then so be it. It should not be the job of journalism to spoon feed the populace bland pleasantries that make them feel good about themselves. Sadly, that species of advocacy journalism is all too common these days.

    I was not talking about spoon feeding, nor did I mention that. I'm was talking about a situation where a vote has been cast, in a legal, binding democratic way. Yes of course people discuss it and argue about it, that's human nature.
    But the media should be rallying round, and don't give me it isn't the medias job to be positive. Because they've done it many times, got the nation together when it's been in turmoil.

    Sorry, but I am indeed going to continue to insist that it is not the media’s job to be positive. Just because some facets of the media have done so before doesn’t somehow validate it as media’s primary purpose or even an important one. This just seems to be a point on which we are in fundamental disagreement — perhaps we should leave it at that.

    Whatever......
  • KrustyBrand
    15340 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    if you come out of the Single Market, it would be a disaster for firms like Nissan (Sunderland) as one example. I believe this will ultimately force many large firms like Nissan, Hitachi, and others to re-locate (no choice). Doubtful the EU will be sympathetic in their break-away terms either.

    Just read how the majority of 18-25 year olds feel duped and didn't even realize what they were voting for - scary. I guess that ties to the 'What is the EU?' top Google search over the past few days in the UK.

    To those who voted to leave, what primary reasons drove you to this being the best solution? Curious.

    I voted leave, not because of immigration tbh but because of the EU itself.

    I honestly believe the organisation itself is too large, has too much red tape and baggage and after 50 years is no longer fit for purpose. It needs to be dismantled and then a newer version (if desired) put into place.

    I like the idea of a common market but just not in its current form

    This line of of reasoning makes me think about the aphorism about “the perfect being the enemy of the good”. I’m not arguing against the notion of working towards or agitating for a better EU, but to leave the current organization, flawed though it may be, in favor of participating in some theoretical one that may never exist strikes me as rash.
  • MrWindermere
    1698 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    It's not the first time that companies have offered people to relocate and many have too. Any way it may not come to that. Companies may not leave I just said it as they weren't happy at the brexit.

    I'm well aware of how relocation works Captain Obvious, that doesn't explain how people will put food on the table if thousands of jobs go (not everyone can just pack up and leave).
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Right let me make my statement a bit clear on the waste of money. I was referring to my original post when I said about it being a waste of money. I just missed of my statement. Yeah it may Seem like a small amount of money but considering that we are susposed to be cutting budgets left right and centre then we throw 100s of millions at more referendum then yes it's a waste of money. And that money should be spent better. Maybe that money could go to helping the steel industry or the manual labouring side or whatever.

    It would be a completely different referendum to the one we've just had. Please give me valid reasons as to why you think we should hold Scotland hostage now England has voted out of the EU?
    HomerND84 wrote:
    The hand over if the borders won't happen over night and if and when it does well be ready for it.

    Good to know - I haven't seen anything official from the government that says we'll be ready. Please provide sources / facts to back up your statement, unless of course it was just another "what could happen" theory. Thanks in advance.

    So now money invested in the housing sector is 50% of what it was just a few days, what do you propose the manual workers who'll be losing their jobs should do?
  • ForumNerds
    2465 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    But the media should be rallying round, and don't give me it isn't the medias job to be positive. Because they've done it many times, got the nation together when it's been in turmoil.

    I'd like to address this point and ONLY on this point --

    I totally disagree.

    Our economy that was built on nothing but credit. Air. 401-K's. Air. Home ownership. Air. A good number of us (yes, even those of us who were doing just fine) saw the inevitability that things were going to burst.

    Developers were building no affordable homes, so young families (buying into the myth of "the American Dream" that said "if you work hard you can buy a home" ) worked 2 jobs and bought the only homes being built. Those of us who cautioned that 'the zero-interest rates were the only thing making that possible, and what about those balloon payments coming up in four years' were called fear-mongers.

    But the media ignored us. They were too busy "rallying around" and not investigating.

    Americans kept consuming on credit. But guess what happened to those of us who said "Woah. You're not owninganything. You're paying interest so that you can possess it" ? We were called fear-mongers.

    And the media ignored us. They were rallying around the positive side of it all.

    It is NOT the media's job to "rally round". That's what they did before. They were the mouthpiece for the politicians who got us into this mess. It IS the media's job to do journalistic investigation.

    It is the job of a leader to get the people to rally around -- but it is not the media's job to be his mouthpiece. It is the media's job to question a politician's 'facts' and to question his motives. Was he bought-and-paid-for? By whom? Does that party have an interest contrary to the politician's constituents? If so, tell us.

    It is the media's job to expose. They're supposed to uncover the facts. But the media is rallying around to keep us from being in fear. A media that rallies around misconception is doing the opposite of what they are meant to do. Where else can the people get the truth? Because the politicians sure ain't gonna tell us. They're operating in the interest of those who bought-and-paid-for them. Unfortunately, the media is bought-and-paid-for by the same group.

    Just my opinion. Based on lots and lots and lots of fear, about what is going to happen when these kids with these massive student loans can't buy homes and the country loses an entire generation of consumers? People seem to think that the kids themselves are the only ones who are going to suffer for their 'choices' ... what those morons don't understand is that -- if this generation of young adults is in so much debt that they can't afford to buy a house, then the SELLER's house is worth zippety-doo-dah. If this generation of young adults can't afford to buy a house, then they won't be consumers of home furnishings, home improvements, or anything else. We are going to lose an entire generation of consumers. So those pompous idiots say "well it's the students' own fault. Let them live with the consequences". Short-sighted idiots with blinders on.

    THAT is the crash I'm worried about.

    And the media is barely covering it. They're talking about how hard it is for the students who owe the money. They're too busy telling us how great our economy is to point out that "our economy" relies on those students.

    They're too busy rallying around. :evil: :evil:

    Sorry. You hit a sore spot. And here I am fear-mongering. :(
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    It's not the first time that companies have offered people to relocate and many have too. Any way it may not come to that. Companies may not leave I just said it as they weren't happy at the brexit.

    I'm well aware of how relocation works Captain Obvious, that doesn't explain how people will put food on the table if thousands of jobs go (not everyone can just pack up and leave).
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Right let me make my statement a bit clear on the waste of money. I was referring to my original post when I said about it being a waste of money. I just missed of my statement. Yeah it may Seem like a small amount of money but considering that we are susposed to be cutting budgets left right and centre then we throw 100s of millions at more referendum then yes it's a waste of money. And that money should be spent better. Maybe that money could go to helping the steel industry or the manual labouring side or whatever.

    It would be a completely different referendum to the one we've just had. Please give me valid reasons as to why you think we should hold Scotland hostage now England has voted out of the EU?
    HomerND84 wrote:
    The hand over if the borders won't happen over night and if and when it does well be ready for it.

    Good to know - I haven't seen anything official from the government that says we'll be ready. Please provide sources / facts to back up your statement, unless of course it was just another "what could happen" theory. Thanks in advance.

    So now money invested in the housing sector is 50% of what it was just a few days, what do you propose the manual workers who'll be losing their jobs should do?

    It doesn't mater it's still a referendum which will be a waste of money. I don't care if you think it's not a waste of money but I do think it is.

    Get new jobs.

    That's cos they haven't yet said so but will get addressd soon.

    I mentiond the money could go to the manual labour section.

    Now your turn who was you?
  • MrWindermere
    1698 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    It doesn't mater it's still a referendum

    What? So only referendums about whether the UK should Remain or Leave the EU is acceptable? That is the complete opposite to a democracy, you are favouring a dictatorship. Mind blown.

    You have no logical reason for keeping Scotland in the UK. I'm speechless.
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Get new jobs.

    What jobs?! According to you and other Leave supporters there are no jobs because migrants have taken them. So please explain where the thousands of new jobs will come from in the coming months?
    HomerND84 wrote:
    That's cos they haven't yet said so but will get addressd soon.

    Right, so you just made that up. Again. The Remain supporters go off facts and stats, you simply make things up as you go along based on your opinion. It's terrifying that you were allowed to vote when you don't know any facts.
    HomerND84 wrote:
    I mentiond the money could go to the manual labour section.

    You think £142 million could support manual workers while they look for other jobs? That would last a few days paying benefits to the potential hundreds of thousands of unemployed - then what?
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Now your turn who was you?

    Who *was* I? I'm still the same person I always was. I haven't been reincarnated, if that's what you're suggesting.
  • jukan00
    2319 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    ForumNerds wrote:
    But the media should be rallying round, and don't give me it isn't the medias job to be positive. Because they've done it many times, got the nation together when it's been in turmoil.

    I'd like to address this point and ONLY on this point --

    I totally disagree.

    Our economy that was built on nothing but credit. Air. 401-K's. Air. Home ownership. Air. A good number of us (yes, even those of us who were doing just fine) saw the inevitability that things were going to burst.

    Developers were building no affordable homes, so young families (buying into the myth of "the American Dream" that said "if you work hard you can buy a home" ) worked 2 jobs and bought the only homes being built. Those of us who cautioned that 'the zero-interest rates were the only thing making that possible, and what about those balloon payments coming up in four years' were called fear-mongers.

    But the media ignored us. They were too busy "rallying around" and not investigating.

    Americans kept consuming on credit. But guess what happened to those of us who said "Woah. You're not owninganything. You're paying interest so that you can possess it" ? We were called fear-mongers.

    And the media ignored us. They were rallying around the positive side of it all.

    It is NOT the media's job to "rally round". That's what they did before. They were the mouthpiece for the politicians who got us into this mess. It IS the media's job to do journalistic investigation.

    It is the job of a leader to get the people to rally around -- but it is not the media's job to be his mouthpiece. It is the media's job to question a politician's 'facts' and to question his motives. Was he bought-and-paid-for? By whom? Does that party have an interest contrary to the politician's constituents? If so, tell us.

    It is the media's job to expose. They're supposed to uncover the facts. But the media is rallying around to keep us from being in fear. A media that rallies around misconception is doing the opposite of what they are meant to do. Where else can the people get the truth? Because the politicians sure ain't gonna tell us. They're operating in the interest of those who bought-and-paid-for them. Unfortunately, the media is bought-and-paid-for by the same group.

    Just my opinion. Based on lots and lots and lots of fear, about what is going to happen when these kids with these massive student loans can't buy homes and the country loses an entire generation of consumers? People seem to think that the kids themselves are the only ones who are going to suffer for their 'choices' ... what those morons don't understand is that -- if this generation of young adults is in so much debt that they can't afford to buy a house, then the SELLER's house is worth zippety-doo-dah. If this generation of young adults can't afford to buy a house, then they won't be consumers of home furnishings, home improvements, or anything else. We are going to lose an entire generation of consumers. So those pompous idiots say "well it's the students' own fault. Let them live with the consequences". Short-sighted idiots with blinders on.

    THAT is the crash I'm worried about.

    And the media is barely covering it. They're talking about how hard it is for the students who owe the money. They're too busy telling us how great our economy is to point out that "our economy" relies on those students.

    They're too busy rallying around. :evil: :evil:

    Sorry. You hit a sore spot. And here I am fear-mongering. :(





    ctU3nLh.png


    Couldn't agree with you more.
  • theslayer369
    2009 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Now your turn who was you?

    Mr Windermere

    Who *was* I? I'm still the same person I always was. I haven't been reincarnated, if that's what you're suggesting.



    What have you got to hide, why so secretive, were just as rude and condescending then, is that why you had to change your name?
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    Who *was* I? I'm still the same person I always was. I haven't been reincarnated, if that's what you're suggesting.

    Name doesn't ring a bell.
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Now your turn who was you?

    Mr Windermere

    Who *was* I? I'm still the same person I always was. I haven't been reincarnated, if that's what you're suggesting.



    What have you got to hide, why so secretive, were just as rude and condescending then, is that why you had to change your name?

    This ^^^^
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    Am not bothered if the Scotts want to stay or not I just think it's a waste of money.

    As for jobs what ever job the want.

    Am not making it up it will get adressed in the future.
  • MrWindermere
    1698 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Now your turn who was you?

    Mr Windermere

    Who *was* I? I'm still the same person I always was. I haven't been reincarnated, if that's what you're suggesting.



    What have you got to hide, why so secretive, were just as rude and condescending then, is that why you had to change your name?

    I haven't changed my name, I made a new account - as I previously stated. I'm not hiding, I fail to see why you need to know who I am - do you base your discussions on the UK and politics based upon your feelings towards that person? If not, there's no issue.

    Rude and condescending - that is nothing compared to the hatred and racism the Leave supporters have shown in recent months.

    I don't believe I've said anything worse than Nick?
  • NicholasD1984
    2623 posts Member
    edited June 2016
    HomerND84 wrote:
    Now your turn who was you?

    Mr Windermere

    Who *was* I? I'm still the same person I always was. I haven't been reincarnated, if that's what you're suggesting.



    What have you got to hide, why so secretive, were just as rude and condescending then, is that why you had to change your name?

    I haven't changed my name, I made a new account - as I previously stated. I'm not hiding, I fail to see why you need to know who I am - do you base your discussions on the UK and politics based upon your feelings towards that person? If not, there's no issue.

    Rude and condescending - that is nothing compared to the hatred and racism the Leave supporters have shown in recent months.

    I don't believe I've said anything worse than Nick?

    ive made my views and you've rounded on me yet you've not gone After anyone else just me constantly. You seem trolling me.
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!