Leaked UK government report says Brexit will damage growth - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Raidyr;53094935]This. You will never convince Boilrig that Brexit was a bad idea, because his entire argument is that the short term is going to be bad, and that the long term is going to be good, but he just extends the short term out as long as necessary while promising that in some nebulous future things will get better. I'm sure there is a word for what I'm trying to explain here but I can't think of it off the top of my head.[/QUOTE] Moving the goalposts perhaps? It's always going to be shit right now and get better [i] later[/i]

[QUOTE=Raidyr;53094935]This. You will never convince Boilrig that Brexit was a bad idea, because his entire argument is that the short term is going to be bad, and that the long term is going to be good, but he just extends the short term out as long as necessary while promising that in some nebulous future things will get better. I'm sure there is a word for what I'm trying to explain here but I can't think of it off the top of my head.[/QUOTE] If we refuse to engage with the other side we have no chance of reasoning with each other. Also, arguments are not entirely for the participants but also for the audience. If someone's on the fence about the issue, hopefully when they read both sides make their case, the truth will speak for itself.

[QUOTE=cis.joshb;53097616]If we refuse to engage with the other side we have no chance of reasoning with each other. Also, arguments are not entirely for the participants but also for the audience. If someone's on the fence about the issue, hopefully when they read both sides make their case, the truth will speak for itself.[/QUOTE] there's a difference between engaging in communication with the other side and talking to a brick wall, which in this case is Boilrig. This has been long logged and definitely should not get confused with refusing debate. Boilrig is pretty much the UK version of Tudd, except people have learned to just not feed the beast and get into his absolutely pointless arguments. Shame people haven't learnt the same with the other..

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53094902]NZ, and oh please, any basic understanding of how democracy or even Government works knows you don't overturn referendums of this size, about a topic such as this, you don't end up closing the discussion, you just make it worse.[/QUOTE] That's pretty funny since by deciding unilaterally to leave the EU based on a minuscule margin in the referendum, the government did close the discussion. 'Should we really do this?' is the obvious question nobody in charge seems willing to ask. Entertaining the discussion would be considering, among other choices, remaining to be a valid possibility. It isn't the case. Also what does basic understanding of democracy entails believing that [I]non-binding[/I] referendums are actually binding?

[QUOTE=_Axel;53098480]That's pretty funny since by deciding unilaterally to leave the EU based on a minuscule margin in the referendum, the government did close the discussion. 'Should we really do this?' is the obvious question nobody in charge seems willing to ask. Entertaining the discussion would be considering, among other choices, remaining to be a valid possibility. It isn't the case. Also what does basic understanding of democracy entails believing that [I]non-binding[/I] referendums are actually binding?[/QUOTE] If you've got a problem with the setup of the referendum, that's fine, it didn't have any rules, and was hastily setup as a political gamble, but that doesn't make it any less official. So just because it is non-binding, means you as a government can just ignore it? You have a pretty fucked up sense of democracy, especially if the consequence is some loss of growth and not full out death or something, but na, economic growth is more important than people's decision, no matter what. It is more or less a statement of intent from the voters, a directive given to government. Ignoring that will have consequences, and I'd rather take a growth hit over 15 years which we all know the UK can deal with, than deal with permanent damage a functioning democracy. It brings everything into question and doesn't actually stop the Brexit question, instead it gives Leave the upper hand and they get to then claim it is another 'vote again, the right way this time' situation from the EU. Thus the end scenario is a binding Brexit referendum with Leave probably winning with voters choosing Leave out of spite of being told to fuck off by the government over an earlier referendum. If you've been paying attention, you'd know 2018 will be a hard year for trust in institutions, which means referendums will be becoming more frequent as the citizens of countries begin to have more distrust their government, instead turning to referedna to force government actions, the last thing you want to do is turn around and say 'you voted wrong' 'its not worth the 5% growth loss over 15 years'.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53093783]It was always going to damage growth, but it was by how much, depends now how this bespoke deal turns out.[/QUOTE] Spin your wheels pal. Just keep spinning them. [editline]31st January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Boilrig;53098807]So just because it is non-binding, means you as a government can just ignore it? You have a pretty fucked up sense of democracy, especially if the consequence is some loss of growth and not full out death or something, but na, economic growth is more important than people's decision, no matter what. It is more or less a statement of intent from the voters, a directive given to government. Ignoring that will have consequences, and I'd rather take a growth hit over 15 years which we all know the UK can deal with, than deal with permanent damage a functioning democracy. It brings everything into question and doesn't actually stop the Brexit question, instead it gives Leave the upper hand and they get to then claim it is another 'vote again, the right way this time' situation from the EU. Thus the end scenario is a binding Brexit referendum with Leave probably winning with voters choosing Leave out of spite of being told to fuck off by the government over an earlier referendum. If you've been paying attention, you'd know 2018 will be a hard year for trust in institutions, which means referendums will be becoming more frequent as the citizens of countries begin to have more distrust their government, instead turning to referedna to force government actions, the last thing you want to do is turn around and say 'you voted wrong' 'its not worth the 5% growth loss over 15 years'.[/QUOTE] 200 odd words of "but democracy" meanwhile you fail to recognize the core tenant of democracy is an educated populous, but you think saying "this isn't a good decision factually" is a fucking dig at democracy. No. What it is is a direct statement telling you that the FACTS are that brexit was sold on lies, no democracy survives following lies yet you're whole shtick for 2 fucking years almost is "going against this is attacking democracy" without stating how or why a lie should be followed AT ALL. Basically you're entitled to be totally wrong but the Moreno you bring this up the more you'll have to backpedal when this shit falls apart. As it wills

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53098819]Spin your wheels pal. Just keep spinning them.[/QUOTE] Sure. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53098819] 200 odd words of "but democracy" meanwhile you fail to recognize the core tenant of democracy is an educated populous, but you think saying "this isn't a good decision factually" is a fucking dig at democracy. No. What it is is a direct statement telling you that the FACTS are that brexit was sold on lies, no democracy survives following lies yet you're whole shtick for 2 fucking years almost is "going against this is attacking democracy" without stating how or why a lie should be followed AT ALL. Basically you're entitled to be totally wrong but the Moreno you bring this up the more you'll have to backpedal when this shit falls apart. As it wills[/QUOTE] I agree a core tenet of democracy is an educated populace, but this situation is comparable to a government forming, but I don't see you commenting on that, that can do a hell of a lot more damage than Brexit. If someone lies in a campaign, take them to court, both sides lied at some point, it is impossible not to, but I honestly don't want to go there. It doesn't help the media and the whole fake news played a massive part in this, modern referenda at its finest.

Please state and cite the "lies" told by remain

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53098923]Please state and cite the "lies" told by remain[/QUOTE] That there wasn't 300 million(Or what the fuck ever) being wasted every day that could have been going to the NHS- Wait..

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53098923]Please state and cite the "lies" told by remain[/QUOTE] Straight off the top of my head, the Treasury analysis which hasn't come true, and the Treasury was recently slammed for more or less playing politics, no thanks to the Chancellor. Basically anything around that certain Treasury report, which going across the articles, is more or less biased when it really shouldn't of been, highlighting interference at some level. Whether that counts or not, is up to you, but to me is a pretty cheap shot that got outed as flawed and bias. [URL]http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36355564[/URL] [URL]https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-trust-treasury-brexit[/URL] [URL]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/leaving-the-eu-would-cause-a-year-long-economic-recession-treasury-analysis-finds-a7042881.html[/URL] [URL]https://news.sky.com/story/so-whats-fishy-about-treasury-brexit-report-10291932[/URL] But other than that, it was a pretty straight forward campaign for Remain, and with that in mind, you can't exactly claim that the voting public was so wholefully uninformed that Brexit should be ignored, but sure if you've got overwhelming proof that absolutely everyone or even a large majority of Leave voted for the obviously wrong $250m meme on the side of a bus, or otherwise, go ahead and post that.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53098923]Please state and cite the "lies" told by remain[/QUOTE] [quote]David Cameron implied in a speech about the "serried rows of white headstones" that World War 3 would be upon us if Brexit occurred[/quote] [url]http://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/matthew-ellery/leave-lies-remainers-need_b_12191462.html[/url] I'm neither Remain nor Leave, but there was definitely foul play on either side. I remember hearing about how the Remain side predicted armageddon if Brexit went ahead, but unfortunately I can't find anything about it. Don't see this as "b-b-but Brexit!", I just think it'd be unfair to accuse the Leave side of doing all the lying during the referendum campaigns.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53098807]If you've got a problem with the setup of the referendum, that's fine, it didn't have any rules, and was hastily setup as a political gamble, but that doesn't make it any less official.[/QUOTE] I never said it doesn't make it official? [QUOTE]So just because it is non-binding, means you as a government can just ignore it?[/QUOTE] Again, who said anything about outright ignoring it? You ought to stop putting words in my mouth. [QUOTE]You have a pretty fucked up sense of democracy, especially if the consequence is some loss of growth and not full out death or something, but na, economic growth is more important than people's decision, no matter what.[/QUOTE] You seem to have a weird conception of democracy yourself. If it were as you say then why not just do away with representatives and vote on every piece of legislation through referendums? Would you think that's a good idea? [QUOTE]It is more or less a statement of intent from the voters, a directive given to government. Ignoring that will have consequences, and I'd rather take a growth hit over 15 years which we all know the UK can deal with, than deal with permanent damage a functioning democracy.[/QUOTE] It's also pretty deceptive how you mention the consequences as 'just economic growth', completely ignoring the fact that what this means is people losing their job, losing in buying power, even more people in precarious employment, and the population's living conditions globally worsening. But it's not like that's going to affect you anyway. You're just a kiwi with no stake in the matter except for his sad 'new British empire' delusions. Also, 'functioning democracy' is dubious at best. The UK's voting system is utter unrepresentative shite that [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rGX91rq5I]can lead to absurd results.[/url] [QUOTE]It brings everything into question and doesn't actually stop the Brexit question, instead it gives Leave the upper hand and they get to then claim it is another 'vote again, the right way this time' situation from the EU. Thus the end scenario is a binding Brexit referendum with Leave probably winning with voters choosing Leave out of spite of being told to fuck off by the government over an earlier referendum. If you've been paying attention, you'd know 2018 will be a hard year for trust in institutions, which means referendums will be becoming more frequent as the citizens of countries begin to have more distrust their government, instead turning to referedna to force government actions, the last thing you want to do is turn around and say 'you voted wrong' 'its not worth the 5% growth loss over 15 years'.[/QUOTE] So you say that more referendums is good for democracy, but then you turn around and say that a referendum [I]specifically[/I] to gauge whether Brexit as it is outlined once the government have detailed their 'plan' is something the population want would be bad? Your bias couldn't possibly show more. It wouldn't be a new referendum ~straight from Brussels~ but one to judge whether the UK wants to leave on those terms. But hey, it would challenge your weird wet dream so that's a no I guess. Talk about a fucked up sense of democracy...

Strong and stable

[QUOTE=_Axel;53099696] You seem to have a weird conception of democracy yourself. If it were as you say then why not just do away with representatives and vote on every piece of legislation through referendums? Would you think that's a good idea?[/QUOTE] Ahh, so we're back at the old 'this is what you have representatives for', even though the representatives left it to the people. [QUOTE=_Axel;53099696] It's also pretty deceptive how you mention the consequences as 'just economic growth', completely ignoring the fact that what this means is people losing their job, losing in buying power, even more people in precarious employment, and the population's living conditions globally worsening.[/QUOTE] You just assume I'm ignoring those just because I didn't note them down, but no, we have a fair idea that will happen. But the same still applies, we don't want to be looking at ignoring Brexit because of that. [QUOTE=_Axel;53099696] But it's not like that's going to affect you anyway. You're just a kiwi with no stake in the matter except for his sad 'new British empire' delusions.[/QUOTE] Ok. [QUOTE=_Axel;53099696] Also, 'functioning democracy' is dubious at best. The UK's voting system is utter unrepresentative shite that [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rGX91rq5I]can lead to absurd results.[/url][/QUOTE] Even I've been quoted on here about the UK voting system, its pretty shit, but it doesn't flaw the overall democracy of the UK. [QUOTE=_Axel;53099696] So you say that more referendums is good for democracy, but then you turn around and say that a referendum [I]specifically[/I] to gauge whether Brexit as it is outlined once the government have detailed their 'plan' is something the population want would be bad? Your bias couldn't possibly show more. It wouldn't be a new referendum ~straight from Brussels~ but one to judge whether the UK wants to leave on those terms. But hey, it would challenge your weird wet dream so that's a no I guess. Talk about a fucked up sense of democracy...[/QUOTE] The referendum wouldn't be on whether you would leave, since that has already been decided, as discussed in UK media, a 2nd referendum would be 'Accept the deal offered by the EU' or 'Leave on WTO Terms with No Deal', as you don't want a second referendum to vote down another, because once again, the debate fails to close. I'm fine with a 2nd referendum on those terms, but not one that violates the decision of the 1st referendum, if that situation occurred, the EU would just provide the worst possible deal as the UK wouldn't be serious about leaving.

Why are you scared on a second referendum to with the power to halt brexit?

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53100924]Ahh, so we're back at the old 'this is what you have representatives for', even though the representatives left it to the people.[/quote] Answer the question. [Quote]You just assume I'm ignoring those just because I didn't note them down, but no, we have a fair idea that will happen. But the same still applies, we don't want to be looking at ignoring Brexit because of that.[/quote] So you're fine with people losing their livelihood if it satisfied your delusion then? [Quote]Even I've been quoted on here about the UK voting system, its pretty shit, but it doesn't flaw the overall democracy of the UK.[/quote] Uh, yes it does? Voting is the basis of democracy. If a voting system is shit, then the resulting 'democracy' is shit overall. What good is democracy if it doesn't actually represent the will of the people? [Quote]The referendum wouldn't be on whether you would leave, since that has already been decided, as discussed in UK media, a 2nd referendum would be 'Accept the deal offered by the EU' or 'Leave on WTO Terms with No Deal', as you don't want a second referendum to vote down another, because once again, the debate fails to close. I'm fine with a 2nd referendum on those terms, but not one that violates the decision of the 1st referendum[/quote] So your point is essentially 'no backsies'? 'You don't want a second referendum to vote down another'? Why? You do know that any bill of law that is voted on can be repealed later on right? Why should referendums be any different? This might seem like an alien concept to you, but people can and do change their mind, especially when shown that they've been lied to. How can you claim to be for democracy and not take into account the changes in popular opinion? Why even bother with regular elections if you're just going to assume that people will be fine with the winning candidate forever? [quote]if that situation occurred, the EU would just provide the worst possible deal as the UK wouldn't be serious about leaving.[/QUOTE] Erm, no? The EU has been pretty clear on the fact that the UK can remain, it's UK politicians who claim there's no turning back.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;53102095]Why are you scared on a second referendum to with the power to halt brexit?[/QUOTE] Because he and all the other Brexiteers know that if there were a second referendum, the vote would be to stay in. They know that they only won by 1%, that people aren't stupid enough to be lied to again, and they'll all be out of a job if it happens.

stop arguing with boilrig, literally how many times does this need to be said

[QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;53102504]Because he and all the other Brexiteers know that if there were a second referendum, the vote would be to stay in. They know that they only won by 1%, that people aren't stupid enough to be lied to again, and they'll all be out of a job if it happens.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't be so certain, it's not like the polling has been amazingly convincing.

[QUOTE=_Axel;53102395]Answer the question.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure I've answered that before in another Brexit thread. [QUOTE=_Axel;53102395] So you're fine with people losing their livelihood if it satisfied your delusion then?[/QUOTE] What is the alternative? Government unable to do anything because someone may lose their job? Come on. Those job losses are business decisions. [QUOTE=_Axel;53102395] Uh, yes it does? Voting is the basis of democracy. If a voting system is shit, then the resulting 'democracy' is shit overall. What good is democracy if it doesn't actually represent the will of the people?[/QUOTE] FPTP is simply a way of counting votes, in no way does it flaw the system, it may work better for some countries than others. [QUOTE=_Axel;53102395] So your point is essentially 'no backsies'? 'You don't want a second referendum to vote down another'? Why? You do know that any bill of law that is voted on can be repealed later on right? Why should referendums be any different?[/QUOTE] We don't overturn government because people had a second thought 4 weeks into their new governments term. [QUOTE=_Axel;53102395] This might seem like an alien concept to you, but people can and do change their mind, especially when shown that they've been lied to. How can you claim to be for democracy and not take into account the changes in popular opinion? Why even bother with regular elections if you're just going to assume that people will be fine with the winning candidate forever?[/QUOTE] I'm for democracy, but simple polls on people changing their mind shouldn't determine another referendum, if you wanted another, add it to a party platform and get elected, oh wait, the Conservatives did that and won. [QUOTE=_Axel;53102395] Erm, no? The EU has been pretty clear on the fact that the UK can remain, it's UK politicians who claim there's no turning back.[/QUOTE] Not exactly, some of the countries have raised concerns, if a second referendum was going ahead and it was "Leave the Article 50 Process" and "Take this Deal from the EU", the EU would offer a bad deal on the spot to avoid economic damage themselves. Hell, theres even a movement in the EU from German businesses I was reading about that aim to allow the UK to negotiate their position and possibly remain but with control over the borders, but that won't be happening. [QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;53102504]Because he and all the other Brexiteers know that if there were a second referendum, the vote would be to stay in. They know that they only won by 1%, that people aren't stupid enough to be lied to again, and they'll all be out of a job if it happens.[/QUOTE] Not exactly, the polls were against Brexit last time, and if people feel like their government is screwing over their original vote, it may become more of a protest vote and vote Leave once more. Just because some people say they have moved their vote, doesn't mean other people haven't moved the other way. Even then, if it goes 1% the other way, you've just made the issue worse, and your back at square one, meaning yet another referendum into the future.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53103968]Pretty sure I've answered that before in another Brexit thread.[/QUOTE] Not gonna go through every single Brexit thread just to find that. Just answer now. [QUOTE]What is the alternative? Government unable to do anything because someone may lose their job? Come on. Those job losses are business decisions.[/QUOTE] Business decisions as a direct consequence of political matters. I'm not talking about alternatives here, just showing how little you care for the common man. [QUOTE]FPTP is simply a way of counting votes, in no way does it flaw the system, it may work better for some countries than others.[/QUOTE] I just linked to a video that explains in detail how flawed the system is. Denial does not an argument make. [QUOTE]We don't overturn government because people had a second thought 4 weeks into their new governments term.[/QUOTE] The Brexit referendum was almost 2 years ago. We've seen how bad the UK government is at making it happen and what it will lead to. The people have a lot more visibility and information now on how this will go down than back then. [QUOTE]I'm for democracy, but simple polls on people changing their mind shouldn't determine another referendum[/QUOTE] So you're incapable of giving me an [I]actual argument[/I] that explains why there shouldn't be several referendums on the same issue after a significant duration and change in the political environment? I expected as much from you. [QUOTE]if you wanted another, add it to a party platform and get elected, oh wait, the Conservatives did that and won.[/QUOTE] No popular UK party had remaining in the EU in their program. Also, you're aware that people don't all vote for parties based on single issues right? You can't infer the people's opinion on whether the UK should remain based on general elections results (Particularly when those elections are deeply flawed as demonstrated earlier). That's what referendums are for in the first place. [QUOTE]Not exactly, the polls were against Brexit last time, and if people feel like their government is screwing over their original vote, it may become more of a protest vote and vote Leave once more. Just because some people say they have moved their vote, doesn't mean other people haven't moved the other way. Even then, if it goes 1% the other way, you've just made the issue worse, and your back at square one, meaning yet another referendum into the future.[/QUOTE] Am I witnessing the return of the 'polls aren't accurate' meme?

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53103968] I'm for democracy, but simple polls on people changing their mind shouldn't determine another referendum, if you wanted another, add it to a party platform and get elected, oh wait, the Conservatives did that and won. [/QUOTE] Actually the conservatives failed to secure a majority and had to buy the rest of the seats from Irish Terrorists for a billion pounds.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53094902]. NZ, and oh please, any basic understanding of how democracy or even Government works knows you don't overturn referendums of this size, about a topic such as this, you don't end up closing the discussion, you just make it worse.[/QUOTE] A few dumb things about this statement. 1. When one does a referendun such as this one tends to require a 70% yes vote for it to go through. As it stands brexit is actually pretty fucking undemocratic due to the incredibly small majority win margin. 2. Several referendums like this have just have flat out ignored by governments in recent history. Notably the Catalan independence referendum. Brexit was not legally binding, it was undemocratic to not keep the status quo since there wasnt a clear majority. 3. You live in new zealand and you think brexit is gonna trickle back to NZ and make things better somehow. I fail to see how a weaker britain helps NZ

[QUOTE=Amber902;53109169]A few dumb things about this statement. 1. When one does a referendun such as this one tends to require a 70% yes vote for it to go through. As it stands brexit is actually pretty fucking undemocratic due to the incredibly small majority win margin. 2. Several referendums like this have just have flat out ignored by governments in recent history. Notably the Catalan independence referendum. Brexit was not legally binding, it was undemocratic to not keep the status quo since there wasnt a clear majority. 3. You live in new zealand and you think brexit is gonna trickle back to NZ and make things better somehow. I fail to see how a weaker britain helps NZ[/QUOTE] 1. I've personally never heard of the 70% yes margin, usually rules are applied or certain markers, but for Brexit, it wasn't, the biggest political fuckup of modern history. 2. Yes, several referendums have been ignored in recent history, but if you consider the situation surrounding the referendum, and how much of a political fuck up it was, and thanks to Cameron calling saying it would not turn into a 'neverendum' which cemented the outcome, then he basically had to ensure the survival of his political party by saying they will follow the will of the people and leave, it was political suicide if you failed to follow through with Brexit as the debate would continue. It was basically, suffer if you did, suffer if you didn't. In comparison, the Catalan referendum violated the union of spain, I believe? 3. We'd probably get a trade deal faster with the UK than with the EU, but does it matter?

[QUOTE=Amber902;53109169]A few dumb things about this statement. 1. When one does a referendun such as this one tends to require a 70% yes vote for it to go through. As it stands brexit is actually pretty fucking undemocratic due to the incredibly small majority win margin. 2. Several referendums like this have just have flat out ignored by governments in recent history. Notably the Catalan independence referendum. Brexit was not legally binding, it was undemocratic to not keep the status quo since there wasnt a clear majority. 3. You live in new zealand and you think brexit is gonna trickle back to NZ and make things better somehow. I fail to see how a weaker britain helps NZ[/QUOTE] Incoming semantics argument about the definition of the word majority that attacks the letter of your post rather than its obvious meaning. "One number is bigger than the other so it's by definition a majority and therefore democratic. It's THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE and must be followed no matter how slim the margin, how misled the public, how unbinding the resolution, how sweeping the changes, how ill-prepared the government, and negative the outlook. Of course it was only THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE at that one point in time where I got what I wanted, so any future referendums that may show public opinion has changed and that Brexit may be prevented by the same ~*~majority~*~ and ~*~democracy~*~ I'm touting so hard [i]fucking uhhhhhhhhh[/i]"

broken record here for the third time, don't argue with boilrig. I'm specifically not saying debate because there is no debate within it. How can you not see how shit his arguments are? You aren't going to convince him otherwise, so just save yourselves the favour and either ignore or don't directly respond to him. By feeding him and taking the piss out of him, you're just going to create Tudd V2. Stop, please, I beg of thee

[QUOTE=Boilrig;53109414] 3. We'd probably get a trade deal faster with the UK than with the EU, but does it matter?[/QUOTE] Yes it does. [url]http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/new-zealand/[/url] [quote]I[B]n 2017 the EU and New Zealand entered into a partnership agreement which contains a number of economic and trade cooperation rules.[/B] The EU and New Zealand ended preparatory work in March 2017 for potential trade negotiations. The European Commission has now recommended that the EU begin negotiations for a trade agreement with Australia.[/quote] Gosh you just look so uninformed and delusional in every thread about this. [editline]5th February 2018[/editline] Sry Instant Mix but I always fear that some dumb 12 y/o get in here and believe the unsubstantiated BS he writes.

[QUOTE=Instant Mix;53109486]broken record here for the third time, don't argue with boilrig. I'm specifically not saying debate because there is no debate within it. How can you not see how shit his arguments are? You aren't going to convince him otherwise, so just save yourselves the favour and either ignore or don't directly respond to him. By feeding him and taking the piss out of him, you're just going to create Tudd V2. Stop, please, I beg of thee[/QUOTE] Not responding makes the silent observer think that "Woah look, they don't have a rebuttal, maybe this guy is right after all?" I mean, everyone on the planet knows that Boilrig is [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1524335&p=50593219&viewfull=1#post50593219"]not ever going to listen to facts or statistics[/URL], so every post that you make against the unfounded shit he keeps spouting is basically a public service towards the bystander.

[QUOTE=EcksDee;53109876]Not responding makes the silent observer think that "Woah look, they don't have a rebuttal, maybe this guy is right after all?" I mean, everyone on the planet knows that Boilrig is [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1524335&p=50593219&viewfull=1#post50593219"]not ever going to listen to facts or statistics[/URL], so every post that you make against the unfounded shit he keeps spouting is basically a public service towards the bystander.[/QUOTE] Not responding is true, but making posts that will make the silent reader go "oh, didn't know this guy continuously shits on referendum threads, better ignore him" is better than feeding the troll. Continuing to reply to him will just drag on an endless argument.

[QUOTE=Killuah;53109631]Yes it does. [URL]http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/new-zealand/[/URL] Gosh you just look so uninformed and delusional in every thread about this. Sry Instant Mix but I always fear that some dumb 12 y/o get in here and believe the unsubstantiated BS he writes.[/QUOTE] Yeah, I already know of those plans, we'd end up getting a deal with one or the other first, and as the Australian PM mentioned after Brexit, if it is going to be proper 'free trade' then deals should wrap up quickly, which is the leverage our countries will be using against the UK. [QUOTE=EcksDee;53109876]Not responding makes the silent observer think that "Woah look, they don't have a rebuttal, maybe this guy is right after all?" I mean, everyone on the planet knows that Boilrig is [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1524335&p=50593219&viewfull=1#post50593219"]not ever going to listen to facts or statistics[/URL], so every post that you make against the unfounded shit he keeps spouting is basically a public service towards the bystander.[/QUOTE] Ahh yes, the analysis that got slammed for being bias, overlooking certain facts as mentioned in one of the earlier posts in this thread. This is why they are pushing for a transition deal. [QUOTE=Instant Mix;53110254]Not responding is true, but making posts that will make the silent reader go "oh, didn't know this guy continuously shits on referendum threads, better ignore him" is better than feeding the troll. Continuing to reply to him will just drag on an endless argument.[/QUOTE] I personally hope the argument finishes one day, that a 2nd referendum shouldn't be done and that Brexit, at this point, can't be stopped.