Regret it Brexit?

This is what you said Mostlyharmless.
mostlyharmless Wed 09-May-18 20:44:53
So allygran you are thinking of investigating Activist infiltration on Gransnet?
How interesting. I don’t remember this being raised, even in the most heated discussions over the years, before you joined this thread.

Petra
I love your comment about the tin hat. All I can say is if this is how some people behave and expect that others will not respond then they are use to their own way.

How you have all withstood such behaviour so long is beyond me. It's a small minority of people who hijack the purpose of getting together to share views in a civilised manner.

It spoils it for the two parties engaged in what can only be described as conflict based on my experience thus far. Its ridiculous. It ruins it for other who would like to engage in a civilised conversation and enjoy the exchange without the unnecessary hassle.

These are big topics, they do raise people's blood pressure, but surely a person can read a view put forward by someone who does not share their view without the sort of behaviour that I have experienced and that you and others have described over many years from the same posters.

I have received support and encouragement to continue and not to be put off and am so grateful for that kindness.

My credentials have been questioned from day one. Every trick in the book has been used as far as I can see to dispose of me as a contributor to this thread. From what you have said here and other this is obviously gone on for years.

However, I have triggered a vociferous response for some reason. Now it can't just be because my posts are very long, hopefully it is because of what I say and think. It is because with some they dislike my courtesy. I didn't join to please people, I joined to engage in debate with civilised behaviour taken for granted which on the whole it has been delightful.

So tomorrow is another day, if all of you who have put up with so much for so long can stand it then so can I.

Tomorrow is another day and we shall try again. I might even start a new thread.

Yes I know what I said. But YOU misquoted me later. Read it carefully! As you say.
I see your method of discussion is to not answer when questioned on your own assertions. You wouldn't engage in a discussion with me about "the unelected elite" in the EU. even after you eventually admitted to electing them.
You went off into a tirade about Scandinavia instead. And then deviated into social.mobility , but wouldn't discuss the EU elections.
Finally you claim everyone who doesn't agree with you should be investigated by Gransnet as a suspected "activist"!!!!
Not really worth trying to discuss anything rationally with you is it?

Mostlyharmless

Oh dear I am so sorry that you seem so upset.
If you thought that my response about the unelected eurocrats in the EU was not a satisfactory explanation. I don't know which conversation you had but I just don't recognise what you claiming here.

Shall I be clearer, Juncker etc are not elected. We elect the MEPs not the Junckers of the EU.
We have discussed the EU elections.I said what I said here then.

I do not claim that everyone who disagrees with me should be investigated by Gransnet as a suspected "activist". Please don't misquote me.

As for scandinavia my tirade as you so politely put it was a reponse to another post that discussed Scandinavia and social mobility. They were/are connected.

I think I should refer you to my first few postings I think you will find my own assertions and thoughts and views well laid out there. It's a long posting sorry about that.

Mostlyharmless

Just a small things, on emails and sites like these, because we can't hear the intonation in the voice, obviously as we do when speaking, UPPER CASE letters are regarded as SHOUTS. It alters the way we perceive the communications.

When you post me I would appreciate it if you didn't SHOUT at me by using UPPER CASE in this case YOU . Thank you that would be a really nice courtesy.

But you voted to elect an MEP. They then choose their leaders. Like our Parliament.
We don't vote to elect a Prime Minister. The ruling party does.
You obviously believe the Brexiteers' lies and aren't open to debate.

Despite the assertion of how lovely it is to debate with intelligent people, those intelligent ones are only the ones who are in agreement and say how lovely the other person is. Not much debate other than huge cut n paste articles and disagreement is dismissed as personal insults without addressing the point made. So imho the level of debate is pretty much non existent. My points have yet to be addressed, but I have been threatened in an aggressive manner for merely pointing out inconsistencies. So don’t hold your breath mostly.

Quite geti.

mostly & Geri I really admire your persistence but I think it's futile.

Utterly by AG'S breathtakingly obnoxious post of 01.47. I doubt it breaks the T & Cs otherwise I'd report it. (And don't bother responding to me AG because I won't read it)

I agree maizie.
And the sycophancy is quite freaky!

I think it's the smack of firm government, mostly. They do love a bossyboots

I apologise pollyperkins my comment was a generalisation and I should have made it specific to the posters I was referring too.

Leaving the EU is a great opportunity for the UK and there is much unrest in other countries where many would like to do the same, the EU fat cats must be very worried.
Because we have been in for so long it’s natural to be anxious about coming out, and the disentangling has been/is tortuous.Am now agreeing with those politicians who advocate trading under WTO rules.
Other views are available.

mostlyharmless
The unelected elite. This is from the Guardian June 2014.
"To understand junckers improbable rise, it is necessary to go back to the 2009 Lisbon treaty.
The former Luxembourg prime minister landed the job by an overwhelming majority because national leaders sleepwalked into a trap laid by federalist schemers in the European Parliament and could not summon up the will to do anything about it.
just as they appear to have overlooked reading the fine print of the legal text that governs europe
As Mr Punch would say: "that's the way to do it"

I know some of us think that Cameron wasn't very bright in these matters but he understood very clearly what was happening with the voting in of Juncker and voted against him.

Each newPresidentis nominated by the European Council and formally elected by the European Parliament, for a five-year term. As of 2018, the currentPresidentis Jean-Claude Juncker, who took office on 1 November 2014

I am sure there is a lot of political manoeuvring and lobbying in the EU.
Much like the lobbying, manipulating and backstabbing that led to Theresa May's appointment as PM.
It's politics petra.

Am now agreeing with those politicians who advocate trading under WTO rules.

You'd be much better off agreeing with experts in World trade who will tell you that countries only trade under WTO rules if they have absolutely no other choice. Even Mauritania (a slave based economy), thought to be the only country in the world to trade under WTO turns out to have an FTA in place

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41859691

There is a reason why most countries prefer to make bilateral or multilateral trade agreements; it's more advantageous to all parties concerned.

It may not be advantageous in the end though, in which case trading under WTO rules could be the better option.
Some time to go yet before these things are decided though.

IMO the only backstabbing with regard to TM becoming PM was done by Cameron when having called for the referendum, with no plan if the result was to leave, having said he'd remain in office regardless of the outcome, stabbed the country in the back with his resignation.

He could be described as a rat leaving a sinking ship but our ship hasn't sunk despite the scare mongering and I see no reason why we wont stay afloat.

What do you mean 'it may not be advantageous in the end'?

Why do you think that every country in the world is in a trading bloc or has FTAs with other countries? If WTO was so wonderful they wouldn't be doing that.

Have you done any research on WTO? Consulted any trade experts? Or are you just putting your faith in politicians?

Why the enthusiasm for WTO - another organisation whose rules we will have to follow . I seem to remember something about sovereignty and making up our own rules.

It wasn't about making up our own rules, it was about regaining control and not being continually dictated too.

Why do Leavers find it so difficult to understand that any trade agreement means surrendering some 'control' and abiding by 'rules' that we might not quite like?

As for 'being dictated to'! What absolute rubbish. The UK was one of the key players in the EU.

In order to trade with another country or countries goods and services have to meet agreed standards, regarding quality, safety etc. Each standard is set out in detail, agreed by relevant experts who represent the trading partners. Rather than this work being duplicated over and over for each pair of trading nations, the EU acts collectively in the interests of all. This saves a huge amount of time, money and beaurocracy.

As the EU is the world's largest trading block, our nearest neighbour and represents more than 40% of our trade, we must continue to meet these standards in order to trade. At present we take part in setting the standards. If we leave the EU we will still have to obey the rules or lose business. We will have GIVEN UP CONTROL.

MaizieD Leavers do not find trade agreements difficult to understand. We recognise that the majority of countries in this world trade quite successfully utilising trade agreements beneficial to them. The behemoth of the EU has 27 national battling for the best agreement for their individual country, UK's voice has been getting progressively weaker and just like the Eurovision Song Contest, we are only wanted because we are one of the biggest financial contributors.