The cost of Brexit for us; the ordinary people

In which case I'll just continue ignoring all your comments, roses; not that they amount to much.

Just making a point, Daphne. You find a phrase, which is in very common use, unacceptable. I don't but I'm perfectly happy to acknowledge that some people might. It's not actually something I would normally say on a public forum because I know it might offend some people.
So please accept that, however commonly it might be in use, I find the 'kicking' metaphor deeply unpleasant. It doesn't help that it is closely associated in my mind with Inexplicable hatred of other human beings and extremism of a most unpleasant sort.
The only reason I'm making a song and dance about it is because everyone else is. Even going to the absurd extent of searching for examples of its use in the Press.
As if it's going to change my mind. It isn't.
Can we leave it now?

Durhamjen to Mair

' Definitely a UKIPPER, Mair. Don't like experts at all, do you?'

I have just posted this on another thread (Biggest Political Hypocrite 2016) concerning a link to a site/blog you have used on GN before. :-

' Flipping heck so this is the 'Expert/Guru' you put links up to, in this case Skwakbox, you would have us read , believe and take note of is it.

In his own words:-

'I’m in my 50s (don’t want to have to remember to update this on an annual basis!), male, married with grown-up kids, politically-engaged (member of the Labour and Co-operative Parties) and increasingly socialist as I see the world around me getting less just and more exploitative. I have a knack for analysis, or so I’m told.'

In that case I have as much faith in him as I do Tom Pride / Pride's Purge and The Canary blogs/sites you put links up to and others.

Post Truth/ Fake News / Political Spin you can see what danger lurks on social media. It could be true but personally I will take little regard in future other than to raise or ask for better information or challenge what is said.

I think you could be accused of being too quick to provide links to 'so called experts' and being believed by many.

Experts like Economists are two a penny and for every one that declares this that or tuther there is another to contradict there findings. Then there is the absolute bull s--t spouted by the rest and given credence whilst hiding behind anonymity and blogging like banshee's.

If a link is wrong or a poster 'challenges' your point of view ' say why' but just saying 'you don't like experts' is pretty meaningless.

Perhaps Mair could link us to a Professor of European Law/Politics who fully supports the Brexit case?

The question I would very much like answered mair is how you see a Malthusian UK developing?

Criticising the EU is easy we can all take part in that game, but what is more interesting and vital for the future is how you see a future Britain.

Given your pronouncements with regard to "police state" and "repressive" nature of the current government, how would you go about dismantling this to make what I assume would be a Malthusian utopia?

Just as an aside and in the spirit of the season, I am inclined to think that Dickens model for Scrooge was the Reverend.

Just sterilise all those incontinently breeding immigrants who produce those excess kids who work hard in school and get degrees in useful subjects like health care, science, programming and law. That will sort the country out.

Sterilise them, Jess? Surely that would be a bit expensive and put too much pressure on the NHS? No. Just send them all back where they came from...

And as I replied, POGS, I never said that skwawkbox was written by an expert.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2017/01/04/taking-back-control-should-not-mean-abandoning-an-independent-civil-service/
About the resignation.

Quoting Guido Fawkes now, eh, Mair?

It's a pity Cunco is not on at the moment, as he is the only other person who thinks he's worth reading, as far as I am aware.

I tell you what's interesting, all the comments aimed at Mair are of the sarcastic bitchy variety ( or just plain daft...see Jess and Maizie comments above) whilst the comments from Mair are almost always just giving an answer to an arguement.
Now, had those comments been of, shall we say, a left wing variety, or even a pro Remain stance, then they would have ben pronounced 'pertinent, well thought out, logical' and so on.It really is fascinating to see (I imagine a lot of Gransnet is lurking and reading the posts!)

"Well, at least you will have one person to agree with you."

So if I keep being so rude to people, who are part of the comparatively small group visiting this forum but who don't share my point of view, until they don't feel it worth discussing any more, I can believe I have won the argument and that they are in the minority in the larger world and the politicians will do exactly what I think they should then roses?

I didn't know that ... I wish I had as it would have been much easier than actually putting a cogent argument forward and sharing it with people who are prepared to share their point of view in a reasonable way

Oh, that's so funny....because that is exactly what is happening GG and what YOU and various other posters are doing, hoping that Mair will vanish.The irony of it!

rose that doesn't make sense, how can I who is fundamentally opposed to mairs political philosophy agree that her arguments are well thought out and pertinent. What is pertinent about a Malthusian theory, where the weak go to the wall, and the quicker the better?

You may not agree with the comments ( or all of them) and nobody expects you to be gushing ( haha) but simply to diss, speculate about the poster, and to bitch, is not the way to go.Not that I include you in that group*ww*.

I haven't been rude to anyone roses. I have asked you before, when you threw out the same accusation, to show me where as it would not have been intentional - what would be the point. People on here are generally people I know little about; why would me being rude to them make any difference at all. Saying the same thing several times does not make it true.

I don't want Mair to vanish - that would just be childish. I am happy for her to keep saying what she says. As far as I am concerned all that her posts have done is re-enforced what I felt before about such views. She is perfectly at liberty to hold those views as I am mine.

Whatever you are accusing me of doing must be worrying you out of all proportion as I only posted once I think, yesterday and that was a comment on Jen's link which I found interesting. I am sorry that pathetic little post upset you enough to make another one of your comments. Today I have only posted in reply to what you said. If it had not been so silly I would not have bothered to say anything.

Have a nice day roses. This thread has ceased to be a discussion so I have better things to do.

Surely a Malthusian Utopia is logically impossible. Malthus' view was fundamentally bleak, but has been proven to be wrong in the developed world. Firstly, humans have embraced contraception and secondly, advances in food production techniques have kept up with population growth.

Oh dear, roses! Pots and kettles come to mind.

In other words, you can be fundamentally opposed, come back with your own arguements, debate ( in fact that is really interesting to read) to Mair or anyone else who posts, without all the drip drip drip of silly and sarcastic posts.I am sure you would agree with that.

Different discussion DD and I know this is going even more off thread but what if, in the comparatively near future, there are not enough jobs so people cannot feed themselves?

Logical arguments and discussion are futile when faced with post-factualism.

I am not the one to have had posts deleted on here dd

GG have a nice day yourself .The thread has 'ceased to be a discussion' has it? It could get back on track if it was allowed to do so, I didn't notice much well thought out debate in your last post, just a long complaint.

Be your own conscience roses and let everyone else be their own. Having read your remarks to others you have a lot to be modest about in that department.

I'm preparing to go out, gg2, but my quick answer to that is that societies need to reorganise themselves, so that people support each other. There is absolutely no reason why a rich country such as the UK can't distribute its wealth to care for every single person. We already have a situation where asset holders 'earn' more than those who rely on income from work (the 'rentier' class). There is plenty of work to go round - just look, for example, at those people who are working full time and still have caring responsibilities. Anybody who does anything to make society function should be rewarded for it, even if it isn't by means of traditional monetary 'income'. Those who cannot do anything useful, because they are too ill, severely disabled or a child should be supported from the surplus created by others. That was the original intention of the post-war welfare state.

Glad I'm out for the day. Playground antics are just so tedious.