The cost of Brexit for us; the ordinary people

Without FB, I wouldn't have been in touch with our second cousins
also Ancestry - which could have drawbacks as you could find some American fundamentalist Christian second cousins you would rather not meet .....

Oh dear, perhaps you should read threads other than the ones you seem to want to impose your views on. Be my guest - get out of your smug comfort zone.

"Est-ce que je suis bovvered?

I expect they are the same people who contribute to articles about how the baby boomers stole their pensions, their would-be houses, their future

I would tell them to get on their bikes.

Has that moved the conversation forward or not?

Oh no, those are direct cousins, not second- and they were met thanks to my mother who told them we were visiting Arizona. They were truly charming, we had several holidays together, in the USA, Hawai, Uk ad Switzerland- and then Obama was elected, and the bile came pouring out- the likes of which I'd never experienced. I am glad I met them- but it is now (quietly) over. No fuss, no arguments- you can't argue with Tea Party Trump supporters. Sad, but fact.

No Jalima, I agree. Just had to be said though, at the end of the day and thread.

It seems to me that there are different types of thread. Those which are a genuine discussion, an exchange of views, sometimes a heated argument, but there are two or more sides. There is the other sort where someone has a tub to thump an axe to grind or a lecture to deliver. That sort of OP brooks no contradiction, wriggles out of direct questions or challenges and changes the subject if things are not going their way.
Arguments going forward? No, they become circular when a person will not accept that their argument is foundering.

<iframe width="400" height="500" frameborder="0" src="http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38394109/embed"></iframe>

That was interesting, granjura. Shame it wasn't Daniel Hannan's family. I'd like to see them argue about it.

This is just to listen to, and a bit longer. Experts again, sorry.

theconversation.com/anthill-8-goodbye-2016-hello-2017-70717

Well worth listening to, thanks. I hope others listen to as it was very balanced.

The advice for 2017 too. And golly it won't be easy:

1) make your comments and views constructive in a discussion

2) avoir stereotyping

As said, won't be easy in the current divisive climate- but they are right.

For me, the biggest question remains, re the discontent of the traditional working man (as in person), and the rise of populism. Traditional Labour has little to offer at the moment, as all the traditional Labour industries and trades have gone or are going. No more mines, no more steel, no more ship building (at least not as it used to be)- no more textiles and shoes, no more buttons and... etc, etc. The left cannot magically redress the loss of millions of jobs due to new technologies or globalisation (eg moved to countries where costs are less and workforce plentiful and cheap. And therefore the trust has gone.

Many (not all- as we have said streotypes are not helpful) - of leave workers voted so with false expectations that the losses above would magically return if we closed borders. But most of us know that this is a totally false expectation.

What will be done with the millions, in the UK but elsewhere too- who, for whatever reason, are unable to access and compete for access to all the new High Tec jobs? We can retrain some- but the truth is, we will probably always have a significant and increasing % of people for whom there is no real 'need' in a modern, globalised society. This can only lead to more and more desillusionment and unrest- possibly worse.

So stay positive, stay constructive - ok- but I just can't see the answer to above. Can you?

Time to drop the subject over the festivities until the New Year- when yes, it will continue to be discussed since we still haven't got a clue, and it is neither has our Government- as to what happens next.

In the meantime, did you watch Helen Mirren's 'royal christmas' message on Norton's last night? Yep, 2016 has been a big pile of doodoo for the world.

Festivities over.

twitter.com/hashtag/Brexitopportunity?src=hash

This is good. Gets better the further down you get. What are you all going to do to help Brexit?
Any more ideas?

This is awful. This is what is happening now in this country.

skwawkbox.org/2016/12/27/if-cllrmaroni-suspended-for-standing-up-to-racists-what-is-uklabour-for/

Once more, I feel ashamed of being British. The Brexit vote has a lot to answer for.

Here is another 'cost' of Brexit, unintended may be but deeply worrying for EU Nationals married to British Nationals. It has been quite extensively discussed on the mumsnet Brexit threads but no one seems to have raised it on here.

A Dutch woman who has lived in the UK for 24 years, and has two children with her British husband, has been told by the Home Office that she should make arrangements to leave the country after she applied for citizenship after the EU referendum.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/28/dutch-woman-with-two-british-children-told-to-leave-uk-after-24-years?CMP=share_btn_tw

Astonishingly,a person of any other nationality married to a British spouse would be able to gain British citizenship on the strength of their marriage, but this doesn't apply to EU Nationals.

I wonder if people who voted leave had any idea what they were letting other people in for?

I can find absolutely nothing redeeming in the result of the vote and Day by day it gets worse

That's interesting, Maizie. It means that my daughters in law would be better off if they didn't try to take UK citizenship at the moment, and hung on to their EU membership.

I agree with you, whitewave, absolutely nothing good to show for the vote.
Apparently over 100 finance companies in London are looking into moving to Ireland unless financial passporting remains the same. It can't.

A new word, brexality.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/12/28/the-brexality-of-the-next-few-years-is-chaos-for-no-gain/

It's getting even more interesting. The referendum seems to have asked the wrong question.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

Everything isn't about economic gain. Some things are more important than money. This is something "Bremoaners" seem unable to understand.

It's about the law, Mair. We have British law as well as EU law, and the government has to obey both with Brexit. Unfortunately the idiot Tories have chosen a remainer to lead them. Blame her for not knowing what she is doing, not us. She says she wants to do it all on her own. The other remainers don't have any say in it.

I suspect this is a deliberate attempt to foil or hinder Brexit durham.
Bear in mind the majority of the elite and judiciary are pro EU. They're simply digging out whatever they can to put up obstacles.

However I was making a more general comment, rather than a reference to the legal obstructionism. The majority who voted Brexit didn't o so for economic reasons. If there is an an economic benefit, it's a bonus.

If you read the link, you will see it is not the elite doing it. It is ordinary people who want to remain in the EEA.

'The new claims, in the names of those identified only as W, L, T and B, have been accepted by the high court. One of the barristers involved in the claim, S Chelvan of No5 Chambers, said: “We are seeking a declaration that the UK cannot withdraw from the EEA without the approval of HM Treasury and an act of parliament.

“These are ordinary working men and women who have decided to make their futures in the UK and wish the UK to be their permanent home. One has mixed nationality; one is a non-EEA national but married to an EEA national. We are trying to highlight the various types of people who will be left in a state of limbo following our withdrawal from the EU.”

The European Economic Area Act 1993, Chelvan said, established EEA rights in UK domestic law. The four latest cases are being coordinated by the London law firm David Tang & Co. The lead barrister is Ramby de Mello, of No5 Chambers, who represented the interested parties in Gina Miller’s supreme court article 50 challenge.'

How do you know how the majority of those who voted for Brexit voted? It wasn't on the paper. Even on here, most Brexiteers haven't said. By the way, there isn't an economic bonus to it, and there will not be one.

ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Brexit-Six-months-on.pdf

You forgot to put IMHO in your last comment djen!
Mair I agree with you, it wasn't voted for ( leaving the EU) for economic reasons, although hopefully in time there will be a really good healthy economy going here, but some things are just more important.

Hmm! tell the children of the poor that economic reasons are not prime importance. I rather think that they would disagree. You can only have the luxury of ideas when you have sufficient nutrition and enough to take part in the accepted norms in society.

I did vote for economic reasons as looking at the increasing chaos around the world which will inevitably affect Europe, I am more and more convinced that this country, long term, will
fare much better outside a failing EU than shackled to it.
Idiotic Tories? versus shambolic labour party!! I know which one I'd be putting my money on!!! not poor old Jeremy!!