Jump to content
Gracii Guns

British Politics

Recommended Posts

Image result for zubr beer

 

Keep an eye out for it Len it's good shit there is a version in a brown can too that has a tony bit of honey in it hard to come by that version but its lovely 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

Image result for zubr beer

 

Keep an eye out for it Len it's good shit there is a version in a brown can too that has a tony bit of honey in it hard to come by that version but its lovely 

I seen that shit on the pavement a fair bit, I'll have to have a crack at it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

I seen that shit on the pavement a fair bit, I'll have to have a crack at it. 

Maybe buy a fresh one aye?

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

Maybe buy a fresh one aye?

Why do you always complicate things? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

@downzy what do you think of this? If they and the EU government is heading towards a global government would you be for or against that? 

 

A New World Order ≠ one world government.

I think you fail to understand what most of the people are discussing here.  After WW2 there was a new world order.  After the collapse of the USSR there was a new world order.  It doesn't necessarily denote ceding national sovereignty to a transnational governing body.

There are some challenges and problems facing the world that requires the coordination of governance.

I would suggest learning more about this matter before making up your mind.  It seems most of your knowledge stems from watching YouTube videos.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lukepowell1988 said:

Image result for zubr beer

 

Keep an eye out for it Len it's good shit there is a version in a brown can too that has a tony bit of honey in it hard to come by that version but its lovely 

I think this is sold here in large bottles. 7% I think? It is good. I think they use fresh spring water iirc. Forgot all about that stuff, will have to grab some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

But where do you draw the line?

What would happen if there is evidence of further shifts of opinion in say 3 years' time, 5 years', 10 years', etc.? Do you just re-run the referendum according to perceived changes of public opinion?

The 2016 Referendum was campaigned by both Europhiles and Brexiteers alike as an, ''once in a lifetime'' or ''once in a generation'' thing. That would be it. There would be no further referenda. Re-running it makes a mockery of that, and a mockery of our democracy. 

If I was a remainer, which I'm not but for sake of argument, I'd have accepted the 52% mandate. ''Well, it wouldn't be my opinion but the people have spoken''. 

Who cares whether it was billed as a "once in a lifetime" thing.  Really?  Britain should fall on its sword because of a marketing slogan?  That's nonsense.

While Soul is arguing that people have changed their minds, what matters more to me is that the facts on the ground have changed since 2016.  There were many promises and claims made by the pro-leave side that clearly won't pan out.  

Champions of leaving the EU made claims that leaving the EU wouldn't be leaving the single European market.  With a hard Brexit, that's exactly what will happen.  There was Boris Johnson's claim that the UK would save £350m a week by leaving the EU.  Except that the figure wasn't true and would pale in comparison to the economic costs would be with a hard Brexit.  We know now that a hard Brexit wouldn't save the British money and would like penalize them financially due to substantially lower economic growth.  Another claim was that Turkey was set to join the EU which would open up the British flood gates from refugees.  Turkey's membership into the EU is a long way from happening, if it happens at all.

Again, circumstances have changed.  Claims by the leave side have proven not to be the case.  The question should be put to British voters whether they still wish to leave knowing that many of the arguments made by the leave side are no longer likely and the pain will be real and severe.  Had the British parliament accepted May's deal or there was time to negotiate a new deal then fine, carry on.  But if the choice now is a hard Brexit or to stay, that decision should be put to the voters.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, soon said:

I think this is sold here in large bottles. 7% I think? It is good. I think they use fresh spring water iirc. Forgot all about that stuff, will have to grab some.

It's good shit the one with honey in it is amazing but this is the best polish alcohol of all time 

 

 

Image result for zubrowka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Who cares whether it was billed as a "once in a lifetime" thing.  Really?  Britain should fall on its sword because of a marketing slogan?  That's nonsense.

Its a bit more than a marketing slogan though is it, it was a statement regarding the nature of the referendum, you can't just diffuse that by calling it marketing, by that rationale can anyone rightly aim their arrows at the misinformation or alleged misinformation, you could just turn around and say 'well that was all marketing'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

It's good shit the one with honey in it is amazing but this is the best polish alcohol of all time 

 

 

Image result for zubrowka

Those Poles really like their Bisons, eh? Is the Bison Grass the the flavour of the vodka?

I cant think of the last time I drank vodka, I mainly use it to make extracts. But I did at a Polish wedding - they need that stuff to fuel their jumping, squatting, circle dancing. Its madness!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, soon said:

Those Poles really like their Bisons, eh? Is the Bison Grass the the flavour of the vodka?

I cant think of the last time I drank vodka, I mainly use it to make extracts. But I did at a Polish wedding - they need that stuff to fuel their jumping, squatting, circle dancing. Its madness!

Yeah it has Bison Grass flavoring and has a blade of the stuff in it it's an interesting flavor and doesn't mix too great best drunk neat or with a soda water 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

Yeah it has Bison Grass flavoring and has a blade of the stuff in it it's an interesting flavor and doesn't mix too great best drunk neat or with a soda water 

That sounds really good, actually. I like young-hop beers like Dab for their grassy taste. Also wheat grass shots are tasty. Grass flavoured vodka, what do ya know. Thats neat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, soon said:

That sounds really good, actually. I like young-hop beers like Dab for their grassy taste. Also wheat grass shots are tasty. Grass flavoured vodka, what do ya know. Thats neat.

It's a taste I have acquired over a number of years first time you drink it you will struggle to judge it.

 

Bit of ice some Soda water I have added lemon or lime to that recently that's as close to working as I can get it Red Bull Coke OJ all no no's 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, lukepowell1988 said:

It's a taste I have acquired over a number of years first time you drink it you will struggle to judge it.

 

Bit of ice some Soda water I have added lemon or lime to that recently that's as close to working as I can get it Red Bull Coke OJ all no no's 

Ah, thanks for the tip. Lemon immediately makes sense to me when you list it. Might have to try that with mineral water in place of Soda. I find soda sticky sometimes.

May I ask why, if it took years to warm up to, why not just have ditched it? I guess sometimes challenging flavours can still be appealing and intriguing, like how funky cheeses are for some?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, downzy said:

Who cares whether it was billed as a "once in a lifetime" thing.  Really?  Britain should fall on its sword because of a marketing slogan?  That's nonsense.

It wasn't a marketing slogan but the entire premise under which the referendum was enacted!

58 minutes ago, downzy said:

There was Boris Johnson's claim that the UK would save £350m a week by leaving the EU.  Except that the figure wasn't true

If you believed that, as written on a bus, you deserved to get shafted. In my area, a leave area, nobody voted leave to ''save £350 million'' but because the European Union destroyed our fishing industries. There was no way Northumberland (my county) was ever going to vote ''remain''. There is no way Northumberland would ever vote ''remain'' in future because of the EU's detrimental historic impact on our socio-economy.

£350m? Bah. When I saw that in 2016 I knew they'd pulled it out of their arse.

1 hour ago, downzy said:

Again, circumstances have changed.  Claims by the leave side have proven not to be the case.  The question should be put to British voters whether they still wish to leave knowing that many of the arguments made by the leave side are no longer likely and the pain will be real and severe.  Had the British parliament accepted May's deal or there was time to negotiate a new deal then fine, carry on.  But if the choice now is a hard Brexit or to stay, that decision should be put to the voters.

Well we don't know until we leave, and besides this is all subjective prediction; I read an article the other day that claimed Germany's economy is closer to recession than Britain's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It wasn't a marketing slogan but the entire premise under which the referendum was enacted!

If you believed that, as written on a bus, you deserved to get shafted. In my area, a leave area, nobody voted leave to ''save £350 million'' but because the European Union destroyed our fishing industries. There was no way Northumberland (my county) was ever going to vote ''remain''. There is no way Northumberland would ever vote ''remain'' in future because of the EU's detrimental historic impact on our socio-economy.

£350m? Bah. When I saw that in 2016 I knew they'd pulled it out of their arse.

Well we don't know until we leave, and besides this is all subjective prediction; I read an article the other day that claimed Germany's economy is closer to recession than Britain's. 

What?  We don't know until we leave?  We know for absolute certainty that closing off Europe's market to England will disrupt the English economy, with a high likelihood of having severe negative consequences for some time.  We don't know how far from the cliff to the water the jump would be, but we do know it's a cliff and the landing is going to hurt regardless.

Certainly there are areas in England that will vote to leave regardless, but we don't limit referendums to certain areas of a country that pertain to the entire country.  So because your particular county would repeat its vote to stay that should fuck everyone else?  I grant that there are a large portion of people that voted to leave for reasons that have nothing to do with the arguments presented by the leave side.  But is that a majority?  If those arguments are no longer relative or applicable, shouldn't the matter be brought up to another vote?

The arguments used by the leave side wasn't for a hard Brexit.  The case was made to leave the EU but still have access to the continental market.  If the only two options now are hard Brexit or stay, that should be the only premise that matters.  Resorting to hyperbole ("one in a lifetime") as a legitimate case for staying the course is absurd.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Len Cnut said:

Its a bit more than a marketing slogan though is it, it was a statement regarding the nature of the referendum, you can't just diffuse that by calling it marketing, by that rationale can anyone rightly aim their arrows at the misinformation or alleged misinformation, you could just turn around and say 'well that was all marketing'. 

Not really.  Referendums have no legal basis.  They're simply just a poll.  It's why it takes a vote in Parliament to make something law.  

And as I stated, the nature of the referendum was made on now what appears to be false premises.  The choice presented by the pro-leave campaign was to leave but have access to the European market or to stay.  With the defeat of May's negotiated soft-Brexit plan, that seems far less likely.  

Both sides used false arguments to stay.  The stay side cooked up job reports that were highly untrue.  But it still doesn't change the fact that what faces Britain now isn't the future that was presented in the referendum.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, downzy said:

What?  We don't know until we leave?  We know for absolute certainty that closing off Europe's market to England will disrupt the English economy, with a high likelihood of having severe negative consequences for some time.  We don't know how far from the cliff to the water the jump would be, but we do know it's a cliff and the landing is going to hurt regardless.

There are really a lot of arguments and speculations floating around and we don't know the eventual outcome irrespective. Some cite the UK's renewed ability to negotiate independent trade deals as a positive; indeed Commonwealth countries were shafted when the United Kingdom joined in 1973. Hard Brexiteers desire a Canada Deal whereby we'd have a negotiated free trade deal. 

3 minutes ago, downzy said:

Certainly there are areas in England that will vote to leave regardless, but we don't limit referendums to certain areas of a country that pertain to the entire country.  So because your particular county would repeat its vote to stay that should fuck everyone else?  I grant that there are a large portion of people that voted to leave for reasons that have nothing to do with the arguments presented by the leave side.  

There are actually geographic areas that are larger than where I live with a greater leave vote, so it cannot very well be said we (North East of England) are dragging anyone along - besides, we have a paltry demographic! The Midlands' voted for leave was actually to a greater extent than the North East. Individual constituencies elsewhere are larger leave constituencies than the constituencies where I live. The fishing argument actually effects the entirety of constituencies with a coastline, all home nations, which is a lot of constituencies seeing that we are an island-maritime nation.

9 minutes ago, downzy said:

But is that a majority?  If those arguments are no longer relative or applicable, shouldn't the matter be brought up to another vote?

I suspect people voted for all manner of reason. As I said, Britain has been consistently the most Eurosceptic country since we joined in 1973. The French and Germans even used to complain about it, ''Britain...doesn't know whether she is in Europe or out''. ''Europe'' has split one (of two) of our major parties since we joined the EEC down the middle; Euroscepticism was also rife among the hard-left, Benn, Skinner, (hitherto) Corbyn; and yes, among the far-right. It is not as if we pulled all of this ''leave'' stuff out of our arse in 2016, believing some gibberish on a bus.

13 minutes ago, downzy said:

 The case was made to leave the EU but still have access to the continental market.

The question was quite simple: ''should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union? (Remain/Leave)''.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soon said:

Ah, thanks for the tip. Lemon immediately makes sense to me when you list it. Might have to try that with mineral water in place of Soda. I find soda sticky sometimes.

May I ask why, if it took years to warm up to, why not just have ditched it? I guess sometimes challenging flavours can still be appealing and intriguing, like how funky cheeses are for some?

The Bison Grass flavour is intresting takes some time to adaot to the taste.

 

Then the challange is finding a worthy mixer the poles use Apple Juice so i'm told 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

The question was quite simple: ''should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union? (Remain/Leave)''.

It is such a silly question because it is obvious the answer is "depends….". It depends on what the consequences are of remaining and of leaving. And these consequences are first now starting to be clear to people. Hence people might be changing their opinion. Or rather, people have a more informed opinion now. 

Edited by SoulMonster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, downzy said:

Not really.  Referendums have no legal basis.  They're simply just a poll.  It's why it takes a vote in Parliament to make something law.  

And as I stated, the nature of the referendum was made on now what appears to be false premises.  The choice presented by the pro-leave campaign was to leave but have access to the European market or to stay.  With the defeat of May's negotiated soft-Brexit plan, that seems far less likely.  

Both sides used false arguments to stay.  The stay side cooked up job reports that were highly untrue.  But it still doesn't change the fact that what faces Britain now isn't the future that was presented in the referendum.  

Before the referendum the Cameron government published an official guide, my italics,

Quote

 

 It’s your opportunity to decide if the UK remains in the European Union (EU).

It’s a big decision. One that will affect you, your family 

...

A once in a generation decision

The referendum on Thursday, 23 June is your chance to decide if we should remain in or leave the European Union.

The government believes it is in the best interests of the UK to remain in the EU.

This is the way to protect jobs, provide security, and strengthen the UK’s economy for every family in this country – a clear path into the future, in contrast to the uncertainty of leaving.

This is your decision. The government will implement what you decide.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk/why-the-government-believes-that-voting-to-remain-in-the-european-union-is-the-best-decision-for-the-uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't understand why it matters what was said. If the majority now want to remain, then people shouldn't be bound to lies presented by a previous government. That is just stupid. Of course, I do understand why you keep harping on this, Dies, because you want to leave, after all.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SoulMonster said:

I really don't understand why it matters what was said. If the majority now want to remain, then people shouldn't be bound to lies presented by a previous government. That is just stupid. Of course, I do understand why you keep harping on this, Dies, because you want to leave, after all.

And I understand why you (et al.) say things like ''lies'' and produce a post-Brexit picture of doom and gloom, because you are pro-EU. It is a prevalent remain argument to produce a Brexit future of Armageddon. It is fitting with the remain argument, of a complete reliance on the EU for British prosperity.

The battle lines are obvious.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

And I understand why you (et al.) say things like ''lies'' and produce a post-Brexit picture of doom and gloom, because you are pro-EU. It is a prevalent remain argument to produce a Brexit future of Armageddon. It is fitting with the remain argument, of a complete reliance on the EU for British prosperity.

The battle lines are obvious.

I don't think I have ever argued why UK should remain. I certainly think the UK is better off within the EU, but then again I don't really have such a huge problems with immigration nor the English fisheries having to adopt to modern times. 

Anyway, my argument now is simply that in a proper democracy one shouldn't hang on to referenda that might be outdated. That really isn't an argument for or against Brexit. It is an argument for democracy. If Brexit had happened immediately after the referendum, then all would be good and UK would be out for a long time. But now, a long time after, especially with people being more informed, one should find out what people think before one goes through with Brexit. One simply cannot do something with such huge consequences based on what people thought before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

There are really a lot of arguments and speculations floating around and we don't know the eventual outcome irrespective. Some cite the UK's renewed ability to negotiate independent trade deals as a positive; indeed Commonwealth countries were shafted when the United Kingdom joined in 1973. Hard Brexiteers desire a Canada Deal whereby we'd have a negotiated free trade deal. 

Independent trade deals usually take years to negotiate.  They don't get made overnight.  The last trade deal Canada had with Europe (CETA) began in 2008 and wasn't agreed to and signed by member parties until 2014 (and it still hasn't been ratified by all member states, though for all intent and purposes it's in effect).  In the mean time trade between England and other nations will get bogged down in tariffs and regulations.  Also, think about how England will be scrambling and will be in a much weaker position to set terms of the deal, particularly the first few deals it sets with each country.

If anyone thinks a hard Brexit won't be a disaster for the British economy they are deluded.

Quote

There are actually geographic areas that are larger than where I live with a greater leave vote, so it cannot very well be said we (North East of England) are dragging anyone along - besides, we have a paltry demographic! The Midlands' voted for leave was actually to a greater extent than the North East. Individual constituencies elsewhere are larger leave constituencies than the constituencies where I live. The fishing argument actually effects the entirety of constituencies with a coastline, all home nations, which is a lot of constituencies seeing that we are an island-maritime nation.

You're missing the point.  It doesn't matter how certain regions voted.  The fact remains that 52 percent of those voted made a choice that is not going to be possible without major disruption in the short to medium term.  The were sold a bill of goods that won't be materializing.  It's possible that many of those leave regions of the country might change their vote considering the new realties presented to them.

Also, I looked into what kind of reality UK fishers would have following a hard Brexit.  There's a case it wouldn't be much better, and possibly worse, should a hard Brexit happen:

https://www.ft.com/content/84f51c84-5fe2-11e7-91a7-502f7ee26895

It appears that much of the fish that British fishers catch isn't in British waters.  Britain would need to negotiate new deals with countries like Ireland and Norway.  Otherwise they'll likely deplete domestic stocks that have recovered since the 80s.  Britain also exports more fish than it imports, which would likely result in high tariffs on British fish by neighbouring countries, negating some of the positives derived from more domestic control of fishing policies. 

Quote

I suspect people voted for all manner of reason. As I said, Britain has been consistently the most Eurosceptic country since we joined in 1973. The French and Germans even used to complain about it, ''Britain...doesn't know whether she is in Europe or out''. ''Europe'' has split one (of two) of our major parties since we joined the EEC down the middle; Euroscepticism was also rife among the hard-left, Benn, Skinner, (hitherto) Corbyn; and yes, among the far-right. It is not as if we pulled all of this ''leave'' stuff out of our arse in 2016, believing some gibberish on a bus.

While there is certainly a healthy amount of Euroskepticism within England, let's not pretend that the refugee crisis stemming from Syria and Northern Africa didn't elevate this issue far above its normal place in British political discourse.  

Quote

The question was quite simple: ''should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union? (Remain/Leave)''.

Yes, that was the question, but the leave side framed it in a manner that British people will get all of the advantages of leaving and none of the drawbacks.  Most were told that Britain would sever its political ties to Europe but keep its economic ties in tact.  As I've said, that reality no longer seems to be the case.  So the context has changed and hence the decision should be brought to the voters again under no false impressions that the country gets to keep its economic ties to the continent and all the benefits it derives from it.  

34 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

I really don't understand why it matters what was said. If the majority now want to remain, then people shouldn't be bound to lies presented by a previous government. That is just stupid. Of course, I do understand why you keep harping on this, Dies, because you want to leave, after all.

Exactly.  

Let's continue the path of economic suicide because of the semantics used by a half-wit politician who thought calling a referendum on the matter as a good political move.  

It's mindbogglingly nuts.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×