Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 75   Go Down

Author Topic: Brexit Encore  (Read 149582 times)

Rhossydd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3457
    • http://www.paulholman.com
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #140 on: April 30, 2019, 11:55:46 am »

The problem with referenda is that they require well-informed voters, and that's not easy in this day and age where fake news, foreign interference, and populism, distort a clear view on such complex issues.
A great post Bart overall, but this is at the heart of the problem.

There's a section of the population that have been deliberately targeted with lies and misinformation illegally and privately.

There were good rules for ensuring fair elections and preventing people buying votes either directly or by unfair advertising. In the age of social media that can no longer be policed. How we can move on from this is unclear and very, very worrying.
For a comparatively small sum, someone has done a huge amount of economic damage to the UK and Europe.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #141 on: April 30, 2019, 02:44:35 pm »

A huge shoutout to Rob and his compatriots (and a chuckle for Canadians):

Who are the biggest bullshitters?

Source: The Economist magazine

Quote
‘Bullshitters’ are individuals who claim knowledge or expertise in an area where they actually have little experience or skill.

 :D

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5513
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #142 on: April 30, 2019, 03:16:07 pm »

Any proof/source for that?

Also, does anyone ever have the real need to think about bendiness of bananas in the first place?

Only conversations with friends who worked on the file. Departments like Industry Canada consult with the various industry categories, trade associations, individual companies, etc., whenever regulations are entered into, it is just standard operating procedure. Who else would they be making the rules for? If 48 nations are going to start trading bolts, nuts and washers with each other, they need to be making compatible products. Doing that efficiently is primarily of value to the producers/buyers in that industry, a priori government doesn't care and has no inherent interest in making arbitrary rules, but arranging these things internationally are most easily accomplished by the government departments set up to do exactly that, since the channels of communication are there for that purpose.

How DO people think the world works?

I can't answer your question about banana bends, as I used it as a hypothetical anyway. (I don't know the origins of that meme, but my guess is that it was just emotional nonsense concocted to sell a newspaper or bait a click. Like a lot of things, when you dig you don't find what you originally expected.) There are standards of ground beef, lean, extra lean, etc., there are cuts of wood, 2x3, 2x4, etc., there are sizes of bolt and screw heads, Philips, Robertson, etc., the list is almost endless and there are probably new ones every day. There are grades of fruit, ok for humans, ok for baking, ok for juice, ok for cattle, ETC. And who knows, maybe there is a good reason to categorize the bendiness of bananas, and it's not at all that important than you nor I know what it is, but maybe it is important to someone. Whenever I've had to dig into any subject matter during my life, things have never turned out to be as simple as first imagined.
Logged
--
Robert

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2355
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #143 on: April 30, 2019, 07:03:22 pm »

Given how much has (legally) changed since 2016, readers may wish to read the latest briefing paper published last Friday by the House of Commons titled “ Brexit questions in national and EU courts “ for a brief history and recap of recent legal actions and decisions.
 
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8415/CBP-8415.pdf
Logged

degrub

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2551
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #144 on: April 30, 2019, 11:37:47 pm »

A huge shoutout to Rob and his compatriots (and a chuckle for Canadians):

Who are the biggest bullshitters?

Source: The Economist magazine

 :D

Darn, they forgot the line for us Texans. rest of the country is pulling our ratings once again.. ;) ;D
Logged

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9263
    • site
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #145 on: May 01, 2019, 03:08:42 am »

Given how much has (legally) changed since 2016, readers may wish to read the latest briefing paper published last Friday by the House of Commons titled “ Brexit questions in national and EU courts “ for a brief history and recap of recent legal actions and decisions.
 
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8415/CBP-8415.pdf

It's moderately interesting. However, even though it was written to be clear enough for members of parliament to understand, it's fairly heavy going.

Jeremy
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #146 on: May 01, 2019, 05:54:07 am »

It's moderately interesting. However, even though it was written to be clear enough for members of parliament to understand, it's fairly heavy going.

Jeremy


Maybe it explains a lot: it's mindbendingly dull though vitally important. How is it possible for anyone to hold all of that in the mind, be aware of it in detail without having to stop and look something up and thus lose the point one was already at?

So much appears to be contradictory, or at least able so to seem, that the idea of Joe Public having the capacity to understand it all well enough, and thus base his opinions on anything with confidence, is absurd.

Somebody somewhere here wrote that we elect MPs to take care of matters on our behalf, matters on which we are often not well enough versed to make valid decisions for ourselves. If ever there was need for something to be removed from the public vote because of such shortcomings in the voter, it was this Brexit!

The impasse in Parliament is obviously because even there, not enough is known, in any definitive light, to the very MPs doing battle! If they are out of their depth, with the access they have to information - what chance the rest of us? This entire episode should never have been raised without a long prior examination by those expert in the legal field, upon whose final, published opinions (both for and against the motion), should have stood the information about leaving or not leaving the status quo. All that crap about money for the National Health etc. was smoke and bullshit: it was just an appeal to blind ignorance and wishful thinking and domestic political loyalties, as the image of infinity-challenging lines of swarthy migrants on the sides of transportation was to subliminal - if not overt - racism describing a situation anyway denied us by not being members of Schengen. Illegal migrants have nothing to do with EU laws!

The world is a mess. We know too much so we make too much, yet we know too little to know what to do with what we make.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2019, 07:11:05 am by Rob C »
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #147 on: May 01, 2019, 11:00:13 am »

Soooo much hand wringing about facts. In politics, as in love, facts are irrelevant by themsleves. Ultimately, it is a combination of facts, their interpretation, lies and truths, feelings and emotions, that result in a gut feeling to vote one way or the other.

The idea that there is a rational, “scientific,” objective way to make a political decision is ludicrous by itself.

Robert Roaldi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5513
    • Robert's Photos
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #148 on: May 01, 2019, 11:52:52 am »

Soooo much hand wringing about facts. In politics, as in love, facts are irrelevant by themsleves. Ultimately, it is a combination of facts, their interpretation, lies and truths, feelings and emotions, that result in a gut feeling to vote one way or the other.

The idea that there is a rational, “scientific,” objective way to make a political decision is ludicrous by itself.

True enough, so far as it goes. But there's a wide gulf between that ideal and what we've been witnessing lately. Plenty of room for improvement.
Logged
--
Robert

Jeremy Roussak

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9263
    • site
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #149 on: May 01, 2019, 02:35:32 pm »

An informed decision would already go a long way ...

Informed (in this context) by what, and by whom, and how? One has only to ask the question to realise the futility of attempting to address the problem. The question should never have been asked, and many of us (whether inclined to leave or to stay) resented the fact that it was.

Jeremy
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10475
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #150 on: May 04, 2019, 01:05:52 am »

Informed (in this context) by what, and by whom, and how? One has only to ask the question to realise the futility of attempting to address the problem. The question should never have been asked, and many of us (whether inclined to leave or to stay) resented the fact that it was.


Jeremy,
We are making decisions every day that are influenced by the quality and accuracy of the information we receive, whether by advertising, scientific research, economic assessments, and so on.

Our decisions on any issue are also influenced by our own likes, dislikes, and biases. There are very few of us who are unbiased. I have a very strong bias towards being unbiased, for example.  ;D

In any democratic voting system there is presumably always a margin of error due to a misunderstanding of the issues presented to the voters. I'm fairly confident if another referendum on Brexit were organised, many of those who had voted for Brexit in the first referendum, would change their mind and vote to remain in the EU.

However, in order to justify a second referendum, the point has to be made by the parliament that the referendum process needs amending, so the second referendum should include a referendum on the size of the majority. If 66.7% seems too large, then make it 60% of the total vote. The second referendum could also include the imposition of compulsory voting, as we have in Australia.

If politicians cannot agree on what is sensible, then they are not sensible people and the population will suffer as a result.

Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #151 on: May 04, 2019, 04:28:05 am »

Jeremy,
We are making decisions every day that are influenced by the quality and accuracy of the information we receive, whether by advertising, scientific research, economic assessments, and so on.

Our decisions on any issue are also influenced by our own likes, dislikes, and biases. There are very few of us who are unbiased. I have a very strong bias towards being unbiased, for example.  ;D

In any democratic voting system there is presumably always a margin of error due to a misunderstanding of the issues presented to the voters. I'm fairly confident if another referendum on Brexit were organised, many of those who had voted for Brexit in the first referendum, would change their mind and vote to remain in the EU.

However, in order to justify a second referendum, the point has to be made by the parliament that the referendum process needs amending, so the second referendum should include a referendum on the size of the majority. If 66.7% seems too large, then make it 60% of the total vote. The second referendum could also include the imposition of compulsory voting, as we have in Australia.

If politicians cannot agree on what is sensible, then they are not sensible people and the population will suffer as a result.

I agree with that point, and believe it to be reflected in the result of the local election a day or two ago where both majors got their ass kicked hard. The only clear difference was that the Libs came back from breakfast with Lazarus because they stood as unequivocally remain people - apart from the Scots Nats, of course, who already have a party with two items on the agenda: separation from England and continued membership within Europe...

Their sudden revival (Libs) would perhaps have been even greater if voters had been able to use the opportunity as a unique way of saying lets remain, but it would have meant transferring/betraying? their traditional party loyalties, if even for a strategic moment. That is always a hard thing to do. But abstaining is no answer either, just a fudge.

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10475
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #152 on: May 04, 2019, 07:53:46 am »

I agree with that point, and believe it to be reflected in the result of the local election a day or two ago where both majors got their ass kicked hard. The only clear difference was that the Libs came back from breakfast with Lazarus because they stood as unequivocally remain people - apart from the Scots Nats, of course, who already have a party with two items on the agenda: separation from England and continued membership within Europe...

Their sudden revival (Libs) would perhaps have been even greater if voters had been able to use the opportunity as a unique way of saying lets remain, but it would have meant transferring/betraying? their traditional party loyalties, if even for a strategic moment. That is always a hard thing to do. But abstaining is no answer either, just a fudge.

Rob,
I would like to add that I see a problem in having a second referendum under the same rules as the first referendum. Suppose the 2nd referendum results in a 51.9% majority in favour of remaining. The Brexiteers could then justifiably claim an undemocratic lack of fairness if the government were to take action on the 2nd referendum in preference to the first, and the confusion and indecision might then persist.

There needs to be a change in the law regarding referendums, such as, either a double majority or a significant overall majority.To combine these issues into one referendum might be too messy. If so, then two referendums might be required. The first one to change the rules.

In the meantime, the UK should remain in the EU on the grounds that the first referendum was flawed and subject to a lot of misinformation.
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #153 on: May 04, 2019, 08:56:19 am »

Rob,
I would like to add that I see a problem in having a second referendum under the same rules as the first referendum. Suppose the 2nd referendum results in a 51.9% majority in favour of remaining. The Brexiteers could then justifiably claim an undemocratic lack of fairness if the government were to take action on the 2nd referendum in preference to the first, and the confusion and indecision might then persist.

There needs to be a change in the law regarding referendums, such as, either a double majority or a significant overall majority.To combine these issues into one referendum might be too messy. If so, then two referendums might be required. The first one to change the rules.

In the meantime, the UK should remain in the EU on the grounds that the first referendum was flawed and subject to a lot of misinformation.

Yes, and perhaps the best way is to adopt the numbers rules as laid down by some respected, but non-European Union country just to remove the inevitable screams of fixed!

The silly thing is, the MPs could have squashed this right at the start by pointing out in Parliament that it wasn't a compulsory referendum, just a testing of the waters thing that had made a point of sorts.

Considering the only thing they could agree on was that they couldn't accept a no-deal vote, it seems strange they didn't get their heads together right away and nip it in the bud.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #154 on: May 10, 2019, 07:05:35 am »

Did anyone see the two BBC4 programmes on Brexit, as seen by the fly on the wall on the European side?

Fascinating stuff, revealing the utter lack of comprehension at the reality-denying postures and repeated demands for club benefits without remaining club members.

May must have either a hide of brass or several human traits missing. I would have been too embarrassed repeatedly to demand what cannot be given, for reasons told her over and over again. Just like a child, then.

Rob

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7522
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #155 on: May 10, 2019, 10:19:46 am »

The new royal baby seems to have taken over the headlines for the moment...

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #156 on: May 10, 2019, 02:04:54 pm »

The new royal baby seems to have taken over the headlines for the .moment...

I wonder if it will have dual citizenship? That could prove an interesting situation.

Rob

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18208
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #157 on: May 10, 2019, 02:26:07 pm »

I wonder if it will have dual citizenship? That could prove an interesting situation.

Oh, the irony: being able to travel freely across the Ocean, to the Land of the Free, but not across the Channel, to the Land of the Caliphate (soon) ;)

wcarlew

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #158 on: May 11, 2019, 02:16:03 am »

Depending on the tax treaty in place he best have a good tax lawyer (US Citizen = US Tax..)  ;)
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25122
Re: Brexit Encore
« Reply #159 on: May 11, 2019, 04:10:27 am »

Depending on the tax treaty in place he best have a good tax lawyer (US Citizen = US Tax..)  ;)

Don't panic: it'll be kept in his Dad's name; they're sure to get it covered. There is precedent with US connections: think Mrs Simpson. Let's hope this one works out less painfully.

;-)
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 75   Go Up