Off Topic EU deabte. Which way are you voting ?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

How will you vote in the EU referendum ?

  • Total voters
    74
Status
Not open for further replies.
petersaxton said:
Boris Johnson wasn't in the government - he was a back bench MP.
So nobody has reneged on anything because one organisation said one thing and another organisation will decide on these matters in two years or more time.
If Mr A said: "Lets build an airport at Dover" and the government didn't build an airport at Dover who would be reneging in your mind? The person who wasn't part of any decision making or the government who never suggested it? I don't think anybody was reneging but you appear to have a warped logic.
Click to expand...

I think you have placed too much faith in Mr A ... man's a cnut ... we don't need an airport in Dover ffs <doh>
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zanjinho
NowsufferinginSpain said:
Yes, that's clear. Unfortunately, the leave campaign used that figure to stir up those who were less likely to investigate the whole issue more thoroughly.

The implication was that the £350mill p.w, that we were supposedly paying the EU ( which was a wildly incorrect figure to begin with!) would, or could be available to be spent on the NHS.

As they hoped, several bought into it....
Click to expand...

I doubt many believed much from either side. If anyone considered the figure, it's most likely that they'd have just assumed more finance would be available to the NHS, rather than an absolute value. The majority would have just felt happy that we choose.

The fixation with the amount is much like the insistence it was about immigrants, and much more the position of desperate remainians, than anything of consequence to brexiters.

It's all irrelevant, we're coming out, and it's that that we need to grasp the opportunities in. This sad and desperate need to rake over coals that never lit in the first place just limits meaningful discussion.
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
I doubt many believed much from either side. If anyone considered the figure, it's most likely that they'd have just assumed more finance would be available to the NHS, rather than an absolute value. The majority would have just felt happy that we choose.

The fixation with the amount is much like the insistence it was about immigrants, and much more the position of desperate remainians, than anything of consequence to brexiters.

It's all irrelevant, we're coming out, and it's that that we need to grasp the opportunities in. This sad and desperate need to rake over coals that never lit in the first place just limits meaningful discussion.
Click to expand...

There's nothing desperate about it.

It's a plain and simple fact that it was implied that this wildly inaccurate figure could be available to be spent on the NHS.

The posters have been shown on here enough times!....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smirnoffpriest
petersaxton said:
Boris Johnson wasn't in the government - he was a back bench MP.
So nobody has reneged on anything because one organisation said one thing and another organisation will decide on these matters in two years or more time.
If Mr A said: "Lets build an airport at Dover" and the government didn't build an airport at Dover who would be reneging in your mind? The person who wasn't part of any decision making or the government who never suggested it? I don't think anybody was reneging but you appear to have a warped logic.
Click to expand...

Umm if someone says - Vote to do A and B* will definitely happen - and actually puts that in big letters on a bus, then you do that, then they say actually B was never going to happen, and B was proven to be lies, then it is a lie, no matter which Party Sensible way you try and spin it.

TBH I'd rather believe all the economists, experts and leaders who told us that B was balls before hand than the leader of a party (the Sensible Party) who either has no policies other than one to make the UK similar to the EU, or actually has policies on a blog that reflect the stance of his postings - ie ridiculous.

* 'A' in this case is to vote to leave. 'B' in this case is that leaving will give the us £350m a week which will be spent on the NHS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NSIS
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
I doubt many believed much from either side. If anyone considered the figure, it's most likely that they'd have just assumed more finance would be available to the NHS, rather than an absolute value. The majority would have just felt happy that we choose.

The fixation with the amount is much like the insistence it was about immigrants, and much more the position of desperate remainians, than anything of consequence to brexiters.

It's all irrelevant, we're coming out, and it's that that we need to grasp the opportunities in. This sad and desperate need to rake over coals that never lit in the first place just limits meaningful discussion.
Click to expand...

Plenty of people I spoke either quoted that figure or said that we'd get loads more money from leaving. Total balls, particularly as most of these people seemed to live in the places that are going to lose the most financially from Brexit - ie the poorest areas that received the most EU funding.
 
Smirnoffpriest said:
Umm if someone says - Vote to do A and B* will definitely happen - and actually puts that in big letters on a bus, then you do that, then they say actually B was never going to happen, and B was proven to be lies, then it is a lie, no matter which Party Sensible way you try and spin it.

TBH I'd rather believe all the economists, experts and leaders who told us that B was balls before hand than the leader of a party (the Sensible Party) who either has no policies other than one to make the UK similar to the EU, or actually has policies on a blog that reflect the stance of his postings - ie ridiculous.

* 'A' in this case is to vote to leave. 'B' in this case is that leaving will give the us £350m a week which will be spent on the NHS.
Click to expand...

They didn't actually say that they'd spend £350 million on the NHS. Look.

You must log in or register to see images
 
Smirnoffpriest said:
Plenty of people I spoke either quoted that figure or said that we'd get loads more money from leaving. Total balls, particularly as most of these people seemed to live in the places that are going to lose the most financially from Brexit - ie the poorest areas that received the most EU funding.
Click to expand...

the EU funding is OUR money, sent back with strings and baubles attached.
 
NowsufferinginSpain said:
There's nothing desperate about it.

It's a plain and simple fact that it was implied that this wildly inaccurate figure could be available to be spent on the NHS.

The posters have been shown on here enough times!....
Click to expand...

Nope. It was implied by remainians, who seemingly lack comprehension. I've posted a picture of the bus above. They were never in a position to make a claim that it would happen, only to suggest that we'd be better making our own choices. The mischief is/was from remainians.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Born again Humanitarian
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
Nope. It was implied by remainians, who seemingly lack comprehension. I've posted a picture of the bus above. They were never in a position to make a claim that it would happen, only to suggest that we'd be better making our own choices. The mischief is/was from remainians.
Click to expand...

It's you that lacks comprehension of anything that doesn't reflect your personal view! <ok>

It was a dishonest deception. One that was picked up on by those who looked deeper, but taken at face value by the many who didn't.
 
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
Because the NHS needs money spent on it, and that money is currently going to the EU.
Click to expand...
Nope. The government choose how much to spend on the NHS based on its priorities, taxation policy and how much debt it's prepared to take on.
The choices are not EU or NHS. You could argue a straight choice between increasing the inheritance tax threshold and the NHS but that wouldn't reflect the truth either.
 
NowsufferinginSpain said:
It's you that lacks comprehension of anything that doesn't reflect your personal view! <ok>

It was a dishonest deception. One that was picked up on by those who looked deeper, but taken at face value by the many who didn't.
Click to expand...

You can keep spouting your opinion, it doesn't make it any more a fact. The claim on the side of the bus does not say what others claimed.
 
steveninaster1 said:
Nope. The government choose how much to spend on the NHS based on its priorities, taxation policy and how much debt it's prepared to take on.
The choices are not EU or NHS. You could argue a straight choice between increasing the inheritance tax threshold and the NHS but that wouldn't reflect the truth either.
Click to expand...

Quite right, which is why that's not what I said.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back