independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 16th Sep 2019 1:08pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Can someone from the UK explain Brexit in a way even I can understand.
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 3 of 3 <123
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #60 posted 09/06/19 4:54am

BombSquad

avatar

wow, props to that guy for confronting Boris


https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1169872053890977794?s=12&fbclid=IwAR2K6hF3Z6wCOAeEZNC0cxo2ClbbU5EjWYizpMHiXk0OvZMHGP7EHk87CA4

this is pure gold "You should be in Brussles negotiating. You are in Morley!" LOL

Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #61 posted 09/06/19 7:14am

maplenpg

avatar

BombSquad said:

wow, props to that guy for confronting Boris


https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1169872053890977794?s=12&fbclid=IwAR2K6hF3Z6wCOAeEZNC0cxo2ClbbU5EjWYizpMHiXk0OvZMHGP7EHk87CA4

this is pure gold "You should be in Brussles negotiating. You are in Morley!" LOL

We say what we think up North lol

If you're going to refer to people as 'scum' or 'garbage vomit', at least have a reason to do so.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #62 posted 09/06/19 7:19am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

Is there something in the water.?
It's still eerie to me how both the US and the UK got a pair of matching hair goofs for leaders.
i don't know what to think.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #63 posted 09/06/19 7:23am

poppys

BombSquad said:

wow, props to that guy for confronting Boris


https://twitter.com/bbcpolitics/status/1169872053890977794?s=12&fbclid=IwAR2K6hF3Z6wCOAeEZNC0cxo2ClbbU5EjWYizpMHiXk0OvZMHGP7EHk87CA4

this is pure gold "You should be in Brussles negotiating. You are in Morley!" LOL


Gotta love a guy with an actual point who's not afraid to confront. Boris was pivoting the entire time trying to get away - had that wild cornered rat look in his eyes.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #64 posted 09/06/19 4:04pm

SquirrelMeat

avatar

maplenpg said:

SquirrelMeat said:



There are many different reasons the UK voted to leave, and some themes depend on geographic impact, but immgration and the impact on infrustructure and services sustainablity is generally high up the list.

England, where the leave vote was higher, receives 93% of UK immigration, and has been averaging an intake the size of Leicester City every year for the past decade.

To put that scale into a USA context, England has a bigger population that California, Oregon and Washington states combined, but squeezed onto a land mass smaller than Louisiana. Now imagine adding an annual immigration volume the Size of New Orleans every year for 10 years.

The impact on services and social fabric in some areas is very severe and you can begin to understand why many people want tighter controls.



To be fair Squirrel, much of the North voted to leave and we don't have any problem with immigrants. If anything we'd love people to move up here, start industries, build up the dying towns. The only immigrants we have are Polish farm workers. I'm not sure where your figures are from, but Northern Engand is certainly not being squeezed by immigration in any sense.



Like I said, it's geographic. Depending on what you call North (as my Geordie mates says, 'The North starts at York lol), there is still an impact. Lincolnshire is the prime example; the highest ratio of leave voters, but some of the the least populated land.

On the social cohesion side, there is a bigger impact in the likes of Rotherham.

The squeeze isn't land, its services, and the cohesion isn't change, its speed of change.

.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #65 posted 09/06/19 4:16pm

SquirrelMeat

avatar

deebee said:

guitarslinger44 said:



eek Wow that sounds really really intense

It's also true that we live on just 6% of the land, and that half of England's land is owned by just 1% of its population, so I'd be wary when the situation is framed in quasi-Malthusian terms as being simply one of population vs resources. Nonetheless, one can see how, with the occlusion of the political and economic factors at work in ensuring/limiting certain people's access to needed resources, and in the absence of political solutions that involve addressing their maldistribution and undersupply, people lower down the ladder can come to believe that duking it out with the neighbours for a sufficient share of the fraction of the pie that's been made available to them is a rational move - egged on by friendly compatriots on higher rungs.


That's true, but those numbers can give the wrong impression as the land owners are predominantly farmers, yet the UK is not self sufficient with food resources, due the the volume requirements of the population and the lack of qaulity arable land.

6% urbanised sounds small, but if you doubled it 12%, the population could grow 100% but food resources would drop.

.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #66 posted 09/07/19 12:25am

maplenpg

avatar

SquirrelMeat said:

maplenpg said:

To be fair Squirrel, much of the North voted to leave and we don't have any problem with immigrants. If anything we'd love people to move up here, start industries, build up the dying towns. The only immigrants we have are Polish farm workers. I'm not sure where your figures are from, but Northern Engand is certainly not being squeezed by immigration in any sense.



Like I said, it's geographic. Depending on what you call North (as my Geordie mates says, 'The North starts at York lol), there is still an impact. Lincolnshire is the prime example; the highest ratio of leave voters, but some of the the least populated land.

On the social cohesion side, there is a bigger impact in the likes of Rotherham.

The squeeze isn't land, its services, and the cohesion isn't change, its speed of change.

The squeeze on services, certainly up North around me (I'm further North than York lol), has absolutely nothing to do with immigration. To be blunt, since 2010, we've lost our school, our children's centre, and our hospital (that was the biggie). The only blame for losing these services was 'austerity' (substitute for Tories), yet we know we'll never get them back, even now austerity is allegedly over.

I would love a shop I could walk to, a local pub, a local school, a local takeaway, hell can I push the boat out and say I'd like a coffee shop that I could walk to, but there is no investment, only closures round here. People voted Brexit up here as a two finger salute to the Tories, not because of immigration.

If you're going to refer to people as 'scum' or 'garbage vomit', at least have a reason to do so.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #67 posted 09/07/19 6:18am

deebee

avatar

SquirrelMeat said:

deebee said:

It's also true that we live on just 6% of the land, and that half of England's land is owned by just 1% of its population, so I'd be wary when the situation is framed in quasi-Malthusian terms as being simply one of population vs resources. Nonetheless, one can see how, with the occlusion of the political and economic factors at work in ensuring/limiting certain people's access to needed resources, and in the absence of political solutions that involve addressing their maldistribution and undersupply, people lower down the ladder can come to believe that duking it out with the neighbours for a sufficient share of the fraction of the pie that's been made available to them is a rational move - egged on by friendly compatriots on higher rungs.


That's true, but those numbers can give the wrong impression as the land owners are predominantly farmers, yet the UK is not self sufficient with food resources, due the the volume requirements of the population and the lack of qaulity arable land.

6% urbanised sounds small, but if you doubled it 12%, the population could grow 100% but food resources would drop.

Yes, but it shouldn't be read as a canny new proposal to tarmac over the green belt. But what I think it does correctly hint at is that, in framing the situation as a shortage of green and pleasant land relative to the number of people living off it, we entirely miss the matter of the economic and political factors that largely govern the overall supply of resources and how people acquire or access them as needed. And I'm noting that even this most straightforward and 'natural' resource, the ground beneath our feet, is largely governed by such factors - before one even gets to resource issues like funding for public services or the level of housing stock.

"Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced." - James Baldwin
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #68 posted 09/07/19 6:27am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Imagine if we got rid of our central bank and acted like a regular country. We would be fucked.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #69 posted 09/09/19 7:42am

maplenpg

avatar

Law blocking no deal Brexit passed. Tories to "test the law to it's limits". Parliament suspended until mid-October. Wow, Boris better be working his socks off for a deal by the time they meet again.

If you're going to refer to people as 'scum' or 'garbage vomit', at least have a reason to do so.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #70 posted 09/09/19 11:18am

maplenpg

avatar

And now Bercow has resigned. He'll go Oct 31st.

If you're going to refer to people as 'scum' or 'garbage vomit', at least have a reason to do so.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #71 posted 09/09/19 11:36am

poppys

maplenpg said:

And now Bercow has resigned. He'll go Oct 31st.


Wow, the loss of a true character.

 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #72 posted 09/11/19 7:12am

maplenpg

avatar

poppys said:

maplenpg said:

And now Bercow has resigned. He'll go Oct 31st.


Wow, the loss of a true character.

He's a character alright. Seems he jumped before he was pushed. Much as I liked what he stood for, I always thought he seemed a pompous twat.

If you're going to refer to people as 'scum' or 'garbage vomit', at least have a reason to do so.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #73 posted 09/11/19 7:13am

maplenpg

avatar

And just when we thought it had all gone quiet for a few weeks, the suspension of parliament has been deemed illegal. Supreme court next week. Could it be bye bye Boris already (one can dream)?

If you're going to refer to people as 'scum' or 'garbage vomit', at least have a reason to do so.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #74 posted 09/11/19 7:29am

BombSquad

avatar

^^

it's quite hard to be an even bigger fuckup than May. but Boris is certainly on his way to do achieve just that LOL



a bit of a Bush/Trump scenario

Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #75 posted 09/11/19 8:00am

maplenpg

avatar

BombSquad said:

^^

it's quite hard to be an even bigger fuckup than May. but Boris is certainly on his way to do achieve just that LOL



a bit of a Bush/Trump scenario

Yup......Serves him right. He deserves everything he gets.

If you're going to refer to people as 'scum' or 'garbage vomit', at least have a reason to do so.
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #76 posted 09/13/19 2:44am

BombSquad

avatar

"If I have been remotely ambiguous so far, let me make myself crystal clear. The only form of Brexit that we have, whenever that might be, will be a Brexit that the House of Commons has explicitly endorsed."

Ha! gotta love Bercow


https://www.theguardian.c...eal-brexit

Ideally speaking, the President of the United States and the dumbest person in the country would be two different people. Oh well.... money can't fix stupid
 Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 3 of 3 <123
Reply   New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Can someone from the UK explain Brexit in a way even I can understand.