What is the point of brexit?

What would you put on a referendum ballot paper bearing in mind leaving without a deal is illegal, there isn't a deal that's gone through parliament, which just leaves Remain! Not much choice by anybody's standards!
I'm sure there is no point in Brexit,there never was,the referendum was a sham! The real point is, that we, Joe and Jo public were led to believe there was by lying duplicitous MP's on both sides of the argument! A deal that clearly never has and never will exist, signing article 50 presumably with fingers crossed behind backs, 'no deal is better than a bad deal' ,not once but umpteen times,respecting the result of the referendum,again presumably with fingers crossed, and on it's relentlessly gone for three long weary years! We now know that negotiations were a sham, and that parliament resembles a bear garden! that the one person who is actually genuinely trying to deliver on brexit will probably end up in prison or be hounded into resignation, while the now self righteous liars and cheaters, having been shown up for what they are, win the day! Well one thing is clear, to get on in this world lying and cheating must be on your CV!

There is a very interesting letter in the New Scientist this week from someone who has been involved with research around the decisions people made when deciding how to vote in the referendum.

I quote:^The level of ignorance about the EU, the reason why it was set up, its operations and benefits, and the peace that has existed since 1945 is staggering.......Many have freely acknowledged that they never understood the full implications of their decision of their vote to leave.^

The interesting thing is he puts much of the blame on the EU because of it's failure to counter the propagandaagaisnt it in Britain. I would also place much of the blame on the British government which, for the last 50 years, has been institutionally anti-EU.

We are in France a lot and adjacent to any project financed by public money there will be boards telling you what is being done and who is funding it, whether the funder is local government, national government or the EU. Our government has never done this. If both the EU and the government over the years had done more to let people know how much they were benefitting from EU funding, the decision might have been different.

Not sure that’s a good argument to use in Britain, France or Germany as the contribute more than they receive. Here in Spain it’s a better idea, as they have benefited to a much greater degree.

But if what we do receive, especially in the more deprived areas, that have most benefitted, was made known, it could affect people's perceptions of the EU.

It is a good idea to publicize the amount spent on projects. Where I live some caves, part of a much larger network, were opened up a few years ago and are now open to the public. Money was provided by the commune, the department, the government and the EU and the boards show how much each contributed. We also have an old abbey and villagers fundraised to get sufficient money to pay for a viability assessment. That target was reached and we are now able to obtain funding for the restoration from the region, the government and the EU. As work proceeds and money is spent there will be boards following the progress of the restoration.

Brexit was never for the ordinary people who three years ago thought it was good for them.

The point of Brexit was and is for mostly well off people who will be richer still when Britain becomes an outpost of the US.

Alexa But it was the better off regions that voted Remain and those in the most deprived areas that voted 'no'.

So those who you see as benfitting from Brexit are those least likely to have voted for it.

Any ideas what to ask in that referendum apart from Remain?!!

Deal or no deal?

None of us know what 'deal' means, exactly and specifically.

"There must be some kind of way out of here,"
Said the joker to the thief,
"There's too much confusion,
I can't get no relief.
Businessman they drink my wine,
Plowman dig my earth
None will level on the line, nobody offered his word, hey"

Too right.

If you don’t accept the vote will make any difference can I presume notanan2 , you have no objection to a peoples vote to confirm your own pedantic views that put our families and grandchildren at risk?

I certainly will vote differently.

I shall certainly be voting differently at the next GE to my vote in 2017.

I much rather trust Jo Swinson than our present PM or Mr Corbyn..

Thanks Rowantree, you've tried and I love your poem!
We'll all vote the same James! There's only one question with only one answer. If Remain is itself a question , to vote No, would mean - what?!!!!

I don't think you can actually 'trust' anyone!! Maybe the least deceitful. I think the dear old libdems can lie with the best of them given the chance, as was proved in the coalition!!

There are part of the UK where the regional funding from the EU has been of considerable benefit and far greater than those regions contributed to the EU, all info available on the web.

"Alexa But it was the better off regions that voted Remain and those in the most deprived areas that voted 'no'.

So those who you see as benfitting from Brexit are those least likely to have voted for it. confused"

Exactly Monica! The media persuaded poor people Brexit would be rather nice and make us all better off.

The people who really stand to profit from Brexit (the 'point of Brexit') are those very rich people who send children to Eton and so on who want to attach their financial welfare to Trumpland and assorted tax havens.

.... and most of those voted Remain.

As for your comments on poorer people and the media, I think that remark is patronising and insulting.

Brexit never had a point. David Cameron, George Osborne and their cronies, the rich Etonians you refer to were all Reaminers and the referendum was so badly run because they thought a Remain vote was a dead cert and never even considered the idea that their could be a majority Leave vote. It was a political move to see off the ERG and their like - and it blew up in their faces. Jacob Rees-Moggs profile in the Conservative party was similar to Jeremy Corbyn's before he won the leadership election. An extremist prat they could afford to ignore. Well, both sides have learnt their lessons and will be less contemptuous of extremist prats in the future

Quite Monica we have to fight back against these dangerous extremes.

The clever bit about the people behind Brexit is that they managed to persuade those who won't benefit from it to vote Leave (by appealing to legitimate concerns) because they needed crosses in boxes to legitimise the whole thing as a democratic choice. They'll be dumped as soon as we've left and they no longer serve any useful purpose.

Dominic Cummings knew exactly what he was doing. He knew what kind of people would vote against anything the government supported and he went for them. Those who will benefit were more than happy to support him financially.

PS. The "Rise of the Nazis" is still on BBC iplayer for a couple more weeks.

I have just enjoyed watching the Last Night of the Proms.

It was great to hear the music from the Albert Hall in London and from the park concerts in Belfast, Swansea and Glasgow which made me feel so grateful for our wonderful United Kingdom.

It was also just fantastic to see how many EU flags were being waved along with the union jacks in the Albert Hall.

It made me so proud and grateful that I am still a citizen of the European Union.

Monica wrote:

"As for your comments on poorer people and the media, I think that remark is patronising and insulting."

Maybe so but it's generally poorer /older people (for identifiable reasons) who fall for right wing propaganda which promises immediate benefits.

The waving of the EU flag was the main reason I chose not to watch! Did they play Ode to Joy?!! A misnomer if ever there was one!

Like many REMAIN voters I can never accept the result of the referendum for the following reasons.

The electorate in 2016 was around 44 million 17.4 million voted leave, 15.6 remain and 11 million did not vote for many reasons. Each reason for voting leave has a counter argument. There were so many lies told which swayed voters so the result was far from sound.

Of the 44 million in 2016 about 2 million (mainly older leave voters) have died and roughly the same number of younger voters (mainly REMAIN) have come of age. The future belong to the young.

Everyone admits we are better off in than out. Very few will benefit from the UK leaving and many will suffer. Yellow Hammer probably has substantial truths.

Reality has shown us that we have only 2 choices. REMAIN or NO DEAL. NO DEAL is too damaging.

The only way forward is a Second Referendum with the facts now better understood. Of course there is no certainty of a REMAIN win but if the is still leave then we will know it will be without a deal.

I'm not fan of David Cameron but his comments on Boris Johnson and others in hindsight are very understandable.

If we LEAVE and it goes wrong we may be able to rejoin but on what terms?

We live in a democracy and had a democratic vote. One side won. And whether we like the outcome or not, it is up to those in parliament to fully support what the majority of voters wanted. It should not be about their personal opinions, the focus should be on putting the vote into action and getting out of the EU in the best way possible. Instead we have had lies (both sides guilty to a greater or lesser extent), sniping about those regarded as 'ignorant' or 'ill-informed' and an incredible situation where our country's fate and negotiating power is being ravaged and weakened from within. Shame.

The Paradise Papers is a set of 13.4 million confidential electronic documents relating to offshore investment that were released into the public domain on 5 November 2017. The Paradise Papers investigation showed how the powerful and ultra-wealthy secretly invest vast amounts of cash in offshore tax havens, but it has been largely swept under the carpet by the mainstream media.

On 7 November 2017, James O'Brien gave a simple explanation for the lack of media coverage of the tax avoidance allegations - "The avoiders own the newspapers." Speaking on LBC, O’Brien launched a scathing attack on Telegraph owners David and Frederick Barclay, Daily Mail owner Jonathan Harmsworth and The Sun and The Times owner Rupert Murdoch for gagging the damning financial data leak.

Barclay brothers Sir David and Sir Frederick, who are estimated to be worth over £7 billion, own their own Channel Island (Brecqhou, off the coast of Sark) and have frequently been accused of tax avoidance.

Harmsworth’s Daily Mail also saved its coverage of one of the biggest financial leaks this century to the tenth page where it also took aim at Corbyn for speaking out about the Queen’s tax affairs.

In 2013, Private Eye reported that Lord Rothermere falsely claims non-dom status, in order to avoid paying tax on his stately home, Ferne House. This move saves him several millions of pounds in tax annually.

The EU tax avoidance laws , due to be implemented in January 2020 will require the super rich who hide money in tax havens to disclose their wealth and pay the taxes which are due.

This gave a very strong motivation for the proprietors of the right wing press to campaign actively for brexit. Newspaper readership was found to be one of the most significant factors influencing the vote in 2016.

Obviously the readers of the right-wing tabloids were hardly likely to vote leave if they had been told that the point was to help the proprietors continue to avoid tax so all sorts of misleading anti-EU propaganda was spread instead.

Or to simplify varian's well presented case, the purpose of Brexit is to give even more to society's Fat Cats, some of whom own the right wing press, while some others are financing Brexit campaign and others are members of the Tory establishment and yes even sit on the government front benches.

Good init