Disgusted, But What Next?

[Javert]

Then you are ignorant of marxist economic ideology or you are wearing Nelson's eye patch.



Enough 'promises' have been made regarding wholesale nationalisation without adequate compensation, compulsory purchase of privately owned assets at below market prices, confiscation without compensation of public company stocks to demonstrate the marxist credentials of Labour.



In the fullness of time we will be able to expand on the compulsory purchase of private schools along with their existing endowments at prices to be decided arbitrarily by a government, which in the extremely unlikely that it has an overall majority, will be the most authoritarian we have had in living memory. It will be interesting to see just how Labour will address the practical task of placing 600,000 privately educated children into the state system against the wishes of their parents.



I full expect that Labour Party supporters will attempt to reassure moderate voters that their touchy feely words don't in reality threaten the whole economic fabric of this country, and however much you attempt to present an objective and reasoned response minimising the very real threat of Labours economic and taxation policies you are not very convincing.



Tax and economic reforms already put forward will lead to increased unemployment, lower living standards, reduced private investment both existing and incoming, capital flight and a shrinking economy.

Nationalising certain industries is not communist.  Many countries in the world have nationalised utilities industries - are you saying those countries are all communist?



If he was proposing to nationalise ALL companies, and equalise taxes so that every single person is paid the same no matter what they do, that would be a communist policy.



If you keep claiming this is marxist, how are you going to describe it if a real Marxist party gets into power?



Also from what I've seen on Fullfact and other sites, the smears of the policy around those companies being confiscated without paying any money to the shareholders and suchlike are misrepresented and wrong.



Increasing marginal tax rates on the most wealthy people in society is also not a communist policy, or at least, if it is, we are already living in communism as we already have higher tax rates for higher earners.  It would only become communist if it sought to equalise everyone's pay across all professions.

[Major Sinic]

Ah yes - what a lovely bunch of teddy bears.



Let's wait for Labour's manifesto to come out and then perhaps you could tell us which specific policies will cause financial catastrophe.  None of the policies they've announced that I've seen constitute  a Marxist or Communist policy, even though you keep stating that they do.



I'm no fan of Corbyn but neither am I convinced by the apoplectic insistence in some quarters that he will turn the UK into the USSR and that he supports terrorists.

Then you are ignorant of marxist economic ideology or you are wearing Nelson's eye patch.



Enough 'promises' have been made regarding wholesale nationalisation without adequate compensation, compulsory purchase of privately owned assets at below market prices, confiscation without compensation of public company stocks to demonstrate the marxist credentials of Labour.



In the fullness of time we will be able to expand on the compulsory purchase of private schools along with their existing endowments at prices to be decided arbitrarily by a government, which in the extremely unlikely that it has an overall majority, will be the most authoritarian we have had in living memory. It will be interesting to see just how Labour will address the practical task of placing 600,000 privately educated children into the state system against the wishes of their parents.



I full expect that Labour Party supporters will attempt to reassure moderate voters that their touchy feely words don't in reality threaten the whole economic fabric of this country, and however much you attempt to present an objective and reasoned response minimising the very real threat of Labours economic and taxation policies you are not very convincing.



Tax and economic reforms already put forward will lead to increased unemployment, lower living standards, reduced private investment both existing and incoming, capital flight and a shrinking economy.

[T00ts]

Ah yes - what a lovely bunch of teddy bears.



Let's wait for Labour's manifesto to come out and then perhaps you could tell us which specific policies will cause financial catastrophe.  None of the policies they've announced that I've seen constitute  a Marxist or Communist policy, even though you keep stating that they do.



I'm no fan of Corbyn but neither am I convinced by the apoplectic insistence in some quarters that he will turn the UK into the USSR and that he supports terrorists.

You really can't be serious!

[Javert]

I do not see either you nor I as fools, but there are many in the Conservative Party with far more knowledge than you and I, who are lifelong Leavers; who have fought for years with the objective of leaving the EU; people like JRM, Stephen Baker, James Cleverly,Iain Duncan-Smith and Bernard Jenkin would never agree to remaining within the EU. Equally the Tory turncoats would not have jeopardised their careers if they had believed that Boris wasn't sincere in leaving with or without a deal.



I find it inconceivable that Boris would not have left on the 31st October had he not been, metaphorically speaking, bound chained and gagged by the Surrender Act, an undemocratic Remain opposition, an SNP interested logically enough in only their own Scottish interests and a partisan Remain Speaker. I repeat the only way we will achieve any form of worthwhile  Brexit is through a majority Conservative government.



Finally Labour in charge of the economy would ensure a financial catastrophe far worse than that under the last lunatic left Labour Government of Jim Callaghan when having bankrupted the country, he was forced to call in the IMF to run our economy.

Ah yes - what a lovely bunch of teddy bears.



Let's wait for Labour's manifesto to come out and then perhaps you could tell us which specific policies will cause financial catastrophe.  None of the policies they've announced that I've seen constitute  a Marxist or Communist policy, even though you keep stating that they do.



I'm no fan of Corbyn but neither am I convinced by the apoplectic insistence in some quarters that he will turn the UK into the USSR and that he supports terrorists.

[Scott777]

I do not see either you nor I as fools, but there are many in the Conservative Party with far more knowledge than you and I, who are lifelong Leavers; who have fought for years with the objective of leaving the EU; people like JRM, Stephen Baker, James Cleverly,Iain Duncan-Smith and Bernard Jenkin would never agree to remaining within the EU. Equally the Tory turncoats would not have jeopardised their careers if they had believed that Boris wasn't sincere in leaving with or without a deal.



I find it inconceivable that Boris would not have left on the 31st October had he not been, metaphorically speaking, bound chained and gagged by the Surrender Act, an undemocratic Remain opposition, an SNP interested logically enough in only their own Scottish interests and a partisan Remain Speaker. I repeat the only way we will achieve any form of worthwhile  Brexit is through a majority Conservative government.



Finally Labour in charge of the economy would ensure a financial catastrophe far worse than that under the last lunatic left Labour Government of Jim Callaghan when having bankrupted the country, he was forced to call in the IMF to run our economy.

JRM is the only one out of your list who I have an ounce of trust to be genuine leavers.  The problem is separating the desire to leave from the desire to get votes by pretending to want to leave.  A am sure we aren't fools, but people with money can afford the best education and the most clever advisers on how to trick you and I.

[Major Sinic]

At least if Corbyn gets in we will know that Brexit has been stopped, whereas I predict a Tory guv to keep on and on and on and on and pretending and delaying and deceiving, until I have died of old age.

I do not see either you nor I as fools, but there are many in the Conservative Party with far more knowledge than you and I, who are lifelong Leavers; who have fought for years with the objective of leaving the EU; people like JRM, Stephen Baker, James Cleverly,Iain Duncan-Smith and Bernard Jenkin would never agree to remaining within the EU. Equally the Tory turncoats would not have jeopardised their careers if they had believed that Boris wasn't sincere in leaving with or without a deal.



I find it inconceivable that Boris would not have left on the 31st October had he not been, metaphorically speaking, bound chained and gagged by the Surrender Act, an undemocratic Remain opposition, an SNP interested logically enough in only their own Scottish interests and a partisan Remain Speaker. I repeat the only way we will achieve any form of worthwhile  Brexit is through a majority Conservative government.



Finally Labour in charge of the economy would ensure a financial catastrophe far worse than that under the last lunatic left Labour Government of Jim Callaghan when having bankrupted the country, he was forced to call in the IMF to run our economy.

[Major Sinic]

Yes - for the moment - but it's a rubbish agreement and he knows it, and it actually doesn't commit him to anything whatsoever other than the withdrawal aspect.  All of the rest is non binding.

You as an ardent Remainer of course think it is a rubbish agreement despite the fact that it gives us either immediately or subsequently most of the things Brexiteers want including the freedom to negotiate our own trade agreements, control immigration, retain the ability to govern ourselves, retain our own currency, choose to align ourselves or not with the many laudable EU standards, return to British justice certainly on British matters.



Any agreement was going to result in a period of implementation with certain inevitable inconveniences. Although a firm Leaver I have never been comfortable with No Deal believing that while ultimately the UK will prosper outside the EU the potential damage of a complete lack of structure would be far more damaging to the UK economy than a period of restrictive EU bureaucracy. For instance we are at liberty to negotiate trade agreements during this period but not to implement them, but on the other hand both we and the EU are able to continue to benefit from free trade in the same interim.



It will not surprise you to know that I think that you are entirely wrong in your reasoning which concludes that Boris will ultimately renegotiate a much softer Brexit. There is little evidence for this conclusion and logic convinces me that it would be political suicide for Boris personally to do this, and he is a survivor not suicideal.

[Scott777]

Sadly we won't agree on this because I refuse to waste my vote. The BP, like UKIP, will get a meaningful vote which will not, under FPTP, be reflected in parliamentary seats. It will however in all likelihood cost the Tories dozens of seats very possibly resulting in no overall majority.



The bookies (generally more reliable than the polls) are offering odds against a Labour overall majority of 20:1 compared with virtually evens on a Tory

 overall victory, so the probability is that unless pigs grow wings, Labour as a minority will attempt to form a harlequin government. The only policy in common with all the opposition parties is a meaningless soft Brexit or more particularly revoking Article 50 and remaining in the EU.



That is people voting for the same old parties with an even more negative twist, with Labour is partial control. This mess, as you so accurately describe it, will continue for months or years to come. By far the greatest economic damage will come not from remaining or leaving but from Labours Marxist policies.

At least if Corbyn gets in we will know that Brexit has been stopped, whereas I predict a Tory guv to keep on and on and on and on and pretending and delaying and deceiving, until I have died of old age.

[Major Sinic]

Sorry, Major, but people voting for the same old parties is exactly why we are in this mess.  Your prophecy is self-fulfilling - in that you, and many other people, think negatively about the possibility of change.  I would argue there is in fact support growing for Farage, and you might be shooting yourself in the foot.

Sadly we won't agree on this because I refuse to waste my vote. The BP, like UKIP, will get a meaningful vote which will not, under FPTP, be reflected in parliamentary seats. It will however in all likelihood cost the Tories dozens of seats very possibly resulting in no overall majority.



The bookies (generally more reliable than the polls) are offering odds against a Labour overall majority of 20:1 compared with virtually evens on a Tory

 overall victory, so the probability is that unless pigs grow wings, Labour as a minority will attempt to form a harlequin government. The only policy in common with all the opposition parties is a meaningless soft Brexit or more particularly revoking Article 50 and remaining in the EU.



That is people voting for the same old parties with an even more negative twist, with Labour is partial control. This mess, as you so accurately describe it, will continue for months or years to come. By far the greatest economic damage will come not from remaining or leaving but from Labours Marxist policies.

[Javert]

Nonsense.

Hard Brexit is not his policy. The agreement he renegotiated with Barnier et al is his plan.

Yes - for the moment - but it's a rubbish agreement and he knows it, and it actually doesn't commit him to anything whatsoever other than the withdrawal aspect.  All of the rest is non binding.

[Barry]

Not to mention, I suspect that if Boris Johnson wins a large majority, he will betray the hardline Brexiters and pivot to a soft deal during 2021 after extending the transition period.  The only reason he is going for hard Brexit now is because it's his only support in parliament.

Nonsense.

Hard Brexit is not his policy. The agreement he renegotiated with Barnier et al is his plan.

[Javert]

Not to mention, I suspect that if Boris Johnson wins a large majority, he will betray the hardline Brexiters and pivot to a soft deal during 2021 after extending the transition period.  The only reason he is going for hard Brexit now is because it's his only support in parliament.

[Scott777]

In general response to No Deal Brexiteers, I would urge you to think carefully before supporting the Brexit Party, not because I don't like and admire Farage, because I do but because the ONLY way a real Brexit will EVER occur is if a majority Conservative Government is elected, and the under 10% who vote for the Brexit Party NO DEAL option will contribute not to a NO DEAL Brexit but to no Brexit at all if they split the Brexit vote.

Sorry, Major, but people voting for the same old parties is exactly why we are in this mess.  Your prophecy is self-fulfilling - in that you, and many other people, think negatively about the possibility of change.  I would argue there is in fact support growing for Farage, and you might be shooting yourself in the foot.

[Javert]

So you keep saying, but the reason the EU reopened the agreement was when Boris completely surrendered and went back to the deal that the previous PM had said "no UK prime minister could ever agree to" - way to go Johnson!  He removed the Irish backstop by pretty close to making the backstop immediate rather than something only that might happen later.  Again, way to go!



Mind you - from what I've seen, you are far from the stupidest person around, but if even you are prepared to fall for this, I'm sure many others will too.



Still - there are some Conservatives who are coming to their senses - I've spoken to two lifelong Conservative voters in the last week who said they will not be voting conservative for the first time in their lives, and that's not directly Brexit related but more because they cannot bring themselves to vote for a party led by Boris Johnson.

[Major Sinic]

The extension was completed and signed off by the PM with a properly signed letter.  It was at that point that Labour agreed to an election.

My understanding is that he sent the Surrender Act letter unsigned, suggesting that it was from the undemocrats in the UK Parliament. A separate signed letter was sent making it clear that as Prime Mnister he didn't wish to have an extension.



Certainly I don't hold Boris responsible for our failure to leave on the 31st October. This can be laid cleanly at the feet of the Remain Opposition and the use of every dirty trick numerous devious Remainers could come up with to disable him. As one nonentity of a Labour MP said; we have put him (BoJo) in a box and won't let him out until we have pulled his teeth. Well fortunately for the country, BoJo was more than a match for such a motley opposition; he's out of his box and his teeth look strong and sharp.



Notwithstanding this, BoJo was convincing enough as far as the EU were concerned to be able get the WA agreement re-opened, and to renegotiate terms which have removed the Irish back stop, and to get this through its second reading. However it was clear to both BoJo and most Leavers that there was no hope in getting this sensible deal through parliament because the Illiberal Undemocrats and their various cling ons, together with a politically self-interested Labour Party were determined that no Tory government was going to succeed in getting Brexit finalised, whatever the wishes and interests of the nation.



In general response to No Deal Brexiteers, I would urge you to think carefully before supporting the Brexit Party, not because I don't like and admire Farage, because I do but because the ONLY way a real Brexit will EVER occur is if a majority Conservative Government is elected, and the under 10% who vote for the Brexit Party NO DEAL option will contribute not to a NO DEAL Brexit but to no Brexit at all if they split the Brexit vote.