Regret it Brexit?

MaizieD the point being made by Joelsnan (using a sports analogy) is tackle the ball not the person. allyg

Wow!
What sport is this? I can’t think of any sport that “tackles a ball!”
It might help your point if what you says actually makes sense allyg.

Correction: say not says.

Isn't that what footballers do? OK they tackle for the ball because if they just tackle the player it's a foul. The ball should be their focus, not another player.

The post made sense to me.

Allyg: Gerispringer "It is interesting how many incoherent pro Brexit posts are applauded as “good posts”."
It is possible that that is because what you consider to be incoherent is not incoherent to everyone. Perspective depends on where you stand Geri.

incoherent:
unclear, confused, muddled, unintelligible, incomprehensible, hard to follow, disjointed, disconnected, unconnected, disordered, mixed up, garbled, jumbled, scrambled

In other words it doesn’t make sense!
A bit like tackling a ball really!

Anything can fail to make sense if you don't want it to mostlyharmless especially if it presents an opposing point of view that you don't know how to respond to.

Gerispringer to Joelsnan: "your assertion that there is simmering unrest in the whole of Europe, when there is little evidence of this."

To state "there is little evidence" of simmering unrest in the whole of Europe prompted me to look on line at the massive economic and social unrest throughout the EEA.

This is something that you can check out for yourself. High unemployment, unrest through stresses on infrastructures because of mass migration, not only within the freedom of movement EEA ,but due to the movement of people from war zones into the EEA.

Whatever the moral stance one has on economic migration from country to country, or the sanctuary offered to those in need, the consequences are that the pressure on housing, education, medical care, and infrastructures are overloaded with volumes of people for whom there is little, or no opportunity to escape poverty brought on by lack of all the essential needs that must be in place to do so.

These 'ghettos" become breeding ground of discontent and hopelessness for citizens and migrant/immigrants alike. This is the reality of much of the EEA at this time. The inability to adjust quickly as a member of the EU/EEA to any economic or social crisis has political knock of effects to individual Country's.

Bill Lee is president of the Customer Reference Forum, Executive Director of the Summit on Customer Engagement, and author of The Hidden Wealth of Customers: Realizing the Untapped Value of Your Most Important Asset (HBR Press, June 2012). He says:

"The lofty purposes the EU originally set for itself included: to give Europeans the convenience of one currency, to enhance mutual prosperity, and to reduce political tensions after centuries of animosity and war.

We’ve seen how mutual prosperity is coming along. As for political tensions, a system whose officials are responsible for the region’s faltering economies but who are not accountable to the tens of millions of unemployed people in them, is obviously exacerbating those tensions rather than alleviating them.

Moreover, by giving up their national currencies, member countries who experience wage inflation can no longer temporarily deflate their currencies to make their exports more attractive.

Those that fall into an economic slowdown or recession can’t “print money” to finance their safety nets for people who are unemployed or who face extreme poverty. Having your own currency may not be such a bad idea after all. Fears that the use of such tools will lead to runaway inflation and interest rates have proven completely unfounded.

Meanwhile the costs and risks of the EU system are enormous. To take just one example, fiscal debt or banking problems in tiny countries like Greece and Cyprus have touched off major crises for the EU."

Bill Lee is president of the Customer Reference Forum, Executive Director of the Summit on Customer Engagement, and author of The Hidden Wealth of Customers: Realizing the Untapped Value of Your Most Important Asset (HBR Press, June 2012).

You might like to read the whole thing on:
hbr.org/2013/06/the-european-union-a-failed-ex

Mostlyharmless Never played sports where are you from then?

That was six years ago - 5 years ago Portugal has a change of Govt with a change of policy and they stopped the austerity. Portugal is now a booming country. I think your article is a bit out of date -none of the countries will be the same as they were then - some will be better and some may be worse.
Things in the U.K. are certainly different to how they were two years ago!

Mostlyharmless: "MaizieD the point being made by Joelsnan (using a sports analogy) is tackle the ball not the person."

To explain.
Brian Taylor put it this way:
“In football, it would be known as playing the man, not the ball. Away from the beautiful game, it might be considered to be an "ad hominem" approach.
Brian Taylor BBC News Political editor, Scotland

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

However, its original meaning was an argument "calculated to appeal to the person addressed more than to impartial reason".
Fallacious ad hominem reasoning is categorized as an informal fallacy,[4] more precisely as a genetic fallacy a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance.

Grahams Hierarchy of Disagreement lists:
Show ad hominem as the second lowest type of argument in a disagreement. With name calling the lowest level.

Yes that's right.
"Ad hominen" is the strategy you use. Reasoned logical argument is what we need on this thread.

Logical argument backed up by evidence that is relevant and up to date, not obscure out of date articles.

Mostlyharmless you said ""Yes that's right.
"Ad hominen" is the strategy you use. Reasoned logical argument is what we need on this thread."

This comment speaks for itself.
.

Not much evidence of reasoned argument from some quarters. Cut n paste out of date articles which do not address the point don’t count as reasoned. But then I’m too dim to understand the meaning of incoherent and need it defined for me. Perhaps you’d like to look up patronising in the dictionary.

Gerispringer cut& paste or not the argument is reasoned by the writer and acknowledged and referenced. If you find information that is more up-to-date, post it if it informs.
All adds to the information.

Don't do yourself down Geri when you say "But then I’m too dim to understand the meaning of incoherent and need it defined for me. Perhaps you’d like to look up patronising in the dictionary." You use these words so often, I am sure you must understand them.

Today the Scottish Parliament has voted against approving Westminster's Brexit Bill. Does that set the cat among the pigeons?

Too much, saepe superbus habitus on here at times me thinks .

I think I’ve used the terms incoherent and patronising once each in this thread. Hardy frequently.

Granny23.
Normally the Sewel Convention means that Westminster would need the consent of the Scottish Parliament on matters devolved.

We all remember Gina Miller who went to law about Article 50 from what I have read, the findings of the Supreme Court
on that matter, means the UK Government can now pass the EU Withdrawal Bill without the nod of the Scottish Parliament.

There will be issues about powers returned to us from the EU, where they would normally be devolved. The Scotsman is saying that the UK Government will hold these powers temporarily where they effect the whole of the UK on fisheries for instance. Once Brexit agreements are settled the power will be devolved back to Scotland.

Support for the EU among its citizens has jumped sharply since the Brexit vote, even as Europeans expressed doubts about Brussels’ handling of migration, trade and the economy. Countries including Germany, France and even the UK all reported a big rise in the number of people with a favourable view of the EU as the bloc’s reputation recovered from a series of crises in recent years.Britain’s vote in June last year to leave the EU has helped coalesce support for the bloc among the 10 countries surveyed, according to the analysis by Pew Research -Financial Times 2017
as requested an article on European view of the EU. I haven’t cut n pasted the whole article as that would make for far too long a post.

Allygran1 I do not consider 'up to 7 years' as temporary.

Granny 23. I suppose it means that it isn't permanent.
As yet I personally haven't seen any time frame for this. The 23 in some reports 25 in other, of the 111 powers coming back to Westminster from the EU that are devolved powers. Are apparently ones that affect the whole of the UK. Therefore until the negotiations are complete they will be held and devolved when negotiations are completed.
If you say up to seven years then you must have seen that somewhere and I take your word for it. It's something we will get more information on as it progresses.

I don't always agree with Granny23 but I have to say that I am proud that the majority in the Scottish Parliament - SNP, Labour, LibDem and Green MSPs have rejected this particular piece of brexit nonsense.

Some of us are happy to be Scottish, British and European citizens.

Gerispringer PAWs Report Financial Times 2017.

The PAWs report referred to by Gerispringer continues....."The report warned that concerns about the EU remained. “[The rise in support] does not necessarily mean these publics are satisfied with the current state of affairs in Europe,” wrote the report’s authors. Renewed enthusiasm was tempered by concern over the EU’s handling of migration, of which a median of 66 per cent disapproved. Only in Germany, Poland and the Netherlands do a majority approve of the EU’s handling of the economy. But this is still a steep rise from a year ago when Brussels’ economic management did not pass 50 per cent approval in any EU country. On trade, only a majority of Germans and Dutch expressed support for the status quo, whereby the EU negotiates trade deals rather than individual countries. A majority of people in all other countries — notably France — wanted their national government to have more of a say. Charles Grant, director of the Centre for European Reform, said a growing economy and ebbing of the worst of the refugee crisis had created a more positive backdrop for the EU in the past year, even as specific doubts remained"

The report contains a survey "Many EU publics want their governments to decide trade agreements"
The survey question was: "Do you think our government should make decisions about international trade agreements for our country or should the EU make decisions about this issue?"
This was put to Greece, France, Sweden, Hungary, Poland, Spain, Italy Netherlands, Germany. The Median was 39% said the EU and 51% Their Governments.
Volunteered categories 'both" and Neither" not shown Source PEW Research Centre. FTcom

Yes Varian wonderful to see cross party support for once joining together in Scotland's best interests.

Very good news from Scotland.