On 05/06/2022 13:54, Java Jive wrote:
> On 05/06/2022 07:58, MB wrote:
> While you're doing the necessary research for your fake news, you may
> care to consider the following real news demonstrating the 'patriotism'
> of those who led us down the road to nowhere ...
>
> John Redwood criticised over advice to pull money out of UK
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/13/labour-accuses-john-redwood-of-talking-britain-down?CMP=share_btn_tw
>
>
> "Labour has criticised the arch-Eurosceptic MP John Redwood for “talking
> down Britain” after he recently wrote a column of financial advice in
> which he recommended investors “look further afield” because of the
> state of the UK economy.
>
> In the piece for the Financial Times, the Conservative MP – who has a
> £180,000 second job as chief global strategist for Charles Stanley –
> said the European Central Bank was promoting faster growth when the UK
> was seeing a squeeze on credit."

It is sheer hypocrisy. John "slimeball" Redwood continued to support
leaving the EU and being well in with, if not a member of the so called
European Research Group even after his constituency voted 56% remain.
Note that the "Research" in the name is a complete lie, they never did
any research, they just made stuff up and wrote a manifesto.

I think they did it (kept feeding us stupid made up reasons to hate to
EU) so that they have us 100% under their control. The Brexiteer MPs
want to be able to do whatever they wish to UK citizens that'll keep
their second jobs paying high wages and their investments paying big
dividends.

Why is nobody up in arms about the fact that their MP, that they voted
for, has to be a parament where other MPs from other UK constituencies
sometimes get to outvote them and impose policies they don't want?
Simple nobody is feeding them made up stupid reasons to leave that
parliament.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

On Sunday, 5 June 2022 at 17:41:52 UTC+1, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 05/06/2022 in message
> <aa01b0e8-79ea-49f4...@googlegroups.com> R. Mark Clayton
> wrote:
> >On Saturday, 4 June 2022 at 22:56:42 UTC+1, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> >SNIP
> >
> >>We're doing very well, left wing remoaner bullshit isn't convincing.
> >
> >Afraid not, look at the facts, not what Grant Schapps said this morning
> >(best in G7, when we are probably the worst)
> >For some facts have a glance at
> >https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/may/30/brexit-uk-firms-eu-trade-northern-ireland
> >No need to read the text, just look at the reputably sourced graphs.
> Wow, in reply to a complaint of left wing bullshit you provide a link to
> left wing bullshit, you couldn't make it up.
trolling alert!
>
> About time the remoaners stopped moaning for goodness sake.

About time you looked at the facts for goodness sake. OK even I think the Grauniad is a bit left wing, but what they didn't do (and Brextremists regularly did) is make up the facts in their story.

Trade has recovered post Covid for EU countries, but categorically NOT for the UK: -
https://www.dropbox.com/s/o1fvrcbyk77xhyt/UK_RoW_Trade_comparison.jpg?dl=0

RoW, US, EU, Japan all roughly back where they were in 2019, UK over 25% DOWN.
Source is Kingdom of the Netherlands Government.

The other graph is from the [UK] Office for National Statistics, so not too hard to find yourself, or is it that if they don't make up data to prove Brexit is working they are bullshitters too?

Project reality is happening.

Or do you have some facts to disprove that?

> --
> Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
> By the time you can make ends meet they move the ends

On 05/06/2022 at 18:14, Tweed wrote:
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>> On 05/06/2022 17:43, Wilf wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/06/2022 at 14:27, Java Jive wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 05/06/2022 14:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Fortunately there are the beginnings of murmurs in political
>>>>> circles about rejoining the single market. I don’t see it happening
>>>>> for a
>>>>> number of years though.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, someday it'll almost certainly have to happen, but, as you say, not
>>>> for some time  -  even in the growing cold light of dawn, there's still
>>>> nothing like enough realism in English politics.
>>>
>>> Sounds nice, but why would they ever accept us back in?
>>
>> Because there are EU companies losing market share in the UK as well UK
>> companies losing market share in the EU, though of course the latter is
>> much more significant as a %-age of GDP.
>>
>
> Exactly. Businesses on either side want to trade, and the existing mess is
> hindering this.
>

Thanks. Makes sense.

--
Wilf

On 05/06/2022 in message
<b0593ef1-26bb-4178-bf0f-32ec065eb060n@googlegroups.com> R. Mark Clayton
wrote:

>Or do you have some facts to disprove that?

I have expressed my view and I'm happy with it. fortunately we live in a
free country so you can have your view, I'm not interested in it and I
don't want any evidence for it, its your.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day.
Tomorrow, isn't looking good either.

On 05/06/2022 in message <t7inh9$nre$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:

>We don't NEED to make these things up, because they are true, it's people
>like you who can't face simple economic facts that are making things up.
>You've now been given 11 links from a wide spectrum of sources, including
>a GOVERNMENT source, that explain the problems to our economy that
>Brexshit has caused, and in reply have failed to give even a single one in
>support of your view that everything is fine.

Not sure who "we" is, do you have a split personality? I note your view
"these things" are true, you are of course welcome to that view and free
to express it. I am delighted that we have regained our independence, long
may it last.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
You can't tell which way the train went by looking at the tracks

On 05/06/2022 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 05/06/2022 in message <t7inh9$nre$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>
>> We don't NEED to make these things up, because they are true, it's
>> people like you who can't face simple economic facts that are making
>> things up. You've now been given 11 links from a wide spectrum of
>> sources, including a GOVERNMENT source, that explain the problems to
>> our economy that Brexshit has caused, and in reply have failed to give
>> even a single one in support of your view that everything is fine.
>
> Not sure who "we" is, do you have a split personality?

The two people who are presenting you with *FACTS* relating to the
economic state of Britain which you are desperately trying to ignore and
pretend that you haven't seen.

> I note your view
> "these things" are true, you are of course welcome to that view and free
> to express it.

I note that you still haven't produced a single shred of evidence to
support your views, while I and others have produced, now, at least 13
links to reports and government publications supporting ours. Nobody is
fooled by your right-wing arsehole posturing that unpleasant economic
facts of life are merely the creation of left-wing media, and your
behavious makes you just another pathetic and unconvincing liar.

> I am delighted that we have regained our independence,
> long may it last.

We were independent before because as an independent nation we chose to
be part of the EU and signed its treaties - to which we should have
adhered - because we gained thereby far more than we gave up. We have
now gained an independence which is nominal only, and forsaken those
very real advantages which were the original reason for our joining. We
are still dependent on the EU for around 50% of our trade, but now on
less favourable terms, and while we are indeed free to trade with the
rest of world, we were free to do so before anyway, but while we were
part of the EU we were stronger and could get better deals than we can
now as a single lone state:

28th January 2020
"Huawei set for limited role in UK 5G networks"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-51283059

12th May 2020
"US message to Britain in bilateral trade talks: it's us – or China "
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/12/us-message-to-britain-in-bilateral-trade-talks-its-us-or-china

24th May 2020
"Fresh UK review into Huawei role in 5G networks"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-52792587

So where's the much-vaunted 'independence' in being bullied by a wanker
like Trump?

I suggest you actually fucking bother to read - *READ*, *MARK*,
*LEARN*, and *INWARDLY DIGEST* as the old-fashioned educational saying
has it - the many links that have already been provided to you.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 05/06/2022 22:41, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> On 05/06/2022 in message
> <b0593ef1-26bb-4178-bf0f-32ec065eb060n@googlegroups.com> R. Mark Clayton
> wrote:
>>
>> Or do you have some facts to disprove that?
>
> I have expressed my view and I'm happy with it.

So, as everyone knew all along, no *FACT*s to support your view.

> fortunately we live in a
> free country so you can have your view, I'm not interested in it and I
> don't want any evidence for it, its your.

Your refusal even to read the ubiquitous contrary evidence is the
clearest proof yet that this is now a quasi-religious belief on your
part, and that you're abusing this ng by using it self-importantly as
your personal pulpit.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 05/06/2022 23:42, Java Jive wrote:

> We were independent before because as an independent nation we chose to
> be part of the EU and signed its treaties
For clarification, "we" (if by that you mean the voting public) didn't
choose to be part of the "Common Market" , or EEC as it then was. It was
Edward Heath who took us in to it in 1972 without a referendum. The
referendum, by the Wilson government, which followed in 1975 confirmed
the status quo.

As to the demographics of who did what in the each referendum, there is
some interesting analysis here:
<https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/07/31/the-referendums-of-1975-and-2016-illustrate-the-continuity-and-change-in-british-euroscepticism/>

--

Jeff

On 05/06/2022 in message <t7jbgg$k02$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:

>On 05/06/2022 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>On 05/06/2022 in message <t7inh9$nre$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>>>We don't NEED to make these things up, because they are true, it's people
>>>like you who can't face simple economic facts that are making things up.
>>>You've now been given 11 links from a wide spectrum of sources, including
>>>a GOVERNMENT source, that explain the problems to our economy that
>>>Brexshit has caused, and in reply have failed to give even a single one
>>>in support of your view that everything is fine.
>>
>>Not sure who "we" is, do you have a split personality?
>
>The two people who are presenting you with FACTS relating to the economic
>state of Britain which you are desperately trying to ignore and pretend
>that you haven't seen.

Do you have authority to speak for Mark Goodge? I am not interested in any
facts you come up with, I have my view, I am entitled to my view and you
can take it or leave it.

>>I note your view "these things" are true, you are of course welcome to
>>that view and free to express it.
>
>I note that you still haven't produced a single shred of evidence to
>support your views, while I and others have produced, now, at least 13
>links to reports and government publications supporting ours. Nobody is
>fooled by your right-wing arsehole posturing that unpleasant economic
>facts of life are merely the creation of left-wing media, and your
>behavious makes you just another pathetic and unconvincing liar.

I have no obligation to provide evidence, I have my view, I am entitled to
my view and you can take it or leave it.

>>I am delighted that we have regained our independence, long may it last.
>
>We were independent before because as an independent nation we chose to be
>part of the EU and signed its treaties - to which we should have adhered
> - because we gained thereby far more than we gave up. We have now gained an independence which is nominal only, and forsaken those very real advantages which were the original reason for our joining. We are still dependent on the EU for around 50% of our trade, but now on less favourable terms, and while we are indeed free to trade with the rest of world, we were free to do so before anyway, but while we were part of the EU we were stronger and could get better deals than we can now as a single lone state:

"We" did not choose to be part of the EU, "we" did vote to stay in the
Common Market.

>I suggest you actually fucking bother to read - READ, MARK, LEARN, and
>*INWARDLY DIGEST* as the old-fashioned educational saying has it - the
>many links that have already been provided to you.

Why , I have my view, I am entitled to my view and you can take it or
leave it.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
All things being equal, fat people use more soap

On 05/06/2022 in message <t7jc3f$na7$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:

>On 05/06/2022 22:41, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>>On 05/06/2022 in message
>><b0593ef1-26bb-4178-bf0f-32ec065eb060n@googlegroups.com> R. Mark Clayton
>>wrote:
>>>
>>>Or do you have some facts to disprove that?
>>
>>I have expressed my view and I'm happy with it.
>
>So, as everyone knew all along, no *FACT*s to support your view.

I have no obligation to provide facts to support my view, who do you think
you are?

>>fortunately we live in a free country so you can have your view, I'm not
>>interested in it and I don't want any evidence for it, its your.
>
>Your refusal even to read the ubiquitous contrary evidence is the clearest
>proof yet that this is now a quasi-religious belief on your part, and that
>you're abusing this ng by using it self-importantly as your personal
>pulpit.

Are you saying I have no right to do that? Now we are independent I can
think what I like and believe what I like, not your concern.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
The true meaning of life is to plant trees under whose shade you do not
expect to sit.

On Monday, 6 June 2022 at 08:42:09 UTC+1, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 05/06/2022 in message <t7jc3f$na7$1...@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>

SNIP

> >So, as everyone knew all along, no *FACT*s to support your view.
> I have no obligation to provide facts to support my view, who do you think
> you are?

You are quite right - you can believe the earth is flat if you like (NB I have seen the curve of the earth if you do), but if you choose to express this opinion in a public forum such as this you can expect two things: -

1. To be challenged to provide factual evidence to support your view.
and
2. Derision if you don't, particularly in the face of a large volume of evidence to the contrary.

SNIP

> Are you saying I have no right to do that? Now we are independent I can
> think what I like and believe what I like, not your concern.

Indeed, but what you publish here is.

Basically - put up or shut up!

> --
> Jeff Gaines Dorset UK

PS it will be interesting having lied to win the referendum whether the Brextremists can now come up with a liar convincing enough that people will believe it is a success. Most people do not keep their fingers in their ears.

On 4 Jun 2022 12:07:59 GMT, "Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On 04/06/2022 in message <v39m9hldc43du6dckj95r6gn3bg3aepcvs@4ax.com>
>Martin wrote:
>
>>>>I refuse to watch a TV station that employs the stinking turd in humanoid
>>>>form know as "Farage".
>>>
>>>We owe him an enormous debt, I'm pretty sure that without him we would
>>>still be stuck in the EU.
>>
>>So it was him and not Boris who destroyed the UK economy?
>
>Garbage. There are many outside factors affecting the economy and we are
>now free to take our own action to deal with them.
>
>Did you know that the number of unemployed is now about equal to the
>number of job vacancies? Time for the unemployed to get on their bikes.

Unemployed are low skilled. Job vacancies are for skilled.

For years the EU was UK's main trading partner. Look at import export figures
now.
--

Martin in Zuid Holland

On 06/06/2022 in message
<0ab019b9-c0a7-46f6-bf22-e7afdbf6a8b9n@googlegroups.com> R. Mark Clayton
wrote:

>On Monday, 6 June 2022 at 08:42:09 UTC+1, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>On 05/06/2022 in message <t7jc3f$na7$1...@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>
>SNIP
>
>>>So, as everyone knew all along, no *FACT*s to support your view.
>>I have no obligation to provide facts to support my view, who do you think
>>you are?
>
>You are quite right - you can believe the earth is flat if you like (NB I
>have seen the curve of the earth if you do), but if you choose to express
>this opinion in a public forum such as this you can expect two things: -
>
>1. To be challenged to provide factual evidence to support your view.
>and
>2. Derision if you don't, particularly in the face of a large volume of
>evidence to the contrary.

No problems but I don't care about either.

>SNIP
>
>>Are you saying I have no right to do that? Now we are independent I can
>>think what I like and believe what I like, not your concern.
>
>Indeed, but what you publish here is.
>
>Basically - put up or shut up!

I have no obligation to do either except it's off topic for the group so
the three of us (sorry I think I referred to you incorrectly) have an
obligation to shut up. Nobody has an obligation to put up of course.

>PS it will be interesting having lied to win the referendum whether the
>Brextremists can now come up with a liar convincing enough that people
>will believe it is a success. Most people do not keep their fingers in
>their ears.

That i just an allegation put forward by snowflake remoaners who have been
brought up to believe that there are no losers.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant

In article <0ab019b9-c0a7-46f6-bf22-e7afdbf6a8b9n@googlegroups.com>,
R. Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:

> You are quite right - you can believe the earth is flat if you like
> (NB I have seen the curve of the earth if you do), but if you
> choose to express this opinion in a public forum such as this you
> can expect two things: -

> 1. To be challenged to provide factual evidence to support your
> view.

> and

> 2. Derision if you don't, particularly in the face of a large
> volume of evidence to the contrary.

Really. This from the man who once told us that whilst driving at
speed in his car listening to the radio, he could clearly tell the
difference in sound quality between CDs and LPs and when asked, told
us this was not surface noise, just sound quality.

Yeah right.

Yes. people believe anything, even that surrendering control of our
own country and any semblance of democracy to an unelected elite in
Brussels is good idea. Just like signing up to the WHO pandemic
control plan is a good idea. If that doesn't guarantee another
pandemic very soon, nothing will.

Bob.

On Sun, 5 Jun 2022 07:58:56 +0100, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:

>On 04/06/2022 18:14, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>> Do your own research, there are daily reports of things we have been able
>> to do now we are independent.
>
>
>And usually not reported by the Left wing media. They will report a
>company moving something to Europe but ignore those moving to the UK.

Hundreds of companies have moved to The Netherlands. Shell moved to UK on paper
but in reality only a few senior Shell executives have moved to UK. Import
exports between NL and UK are 30% of pre-Brexit levels.
--

Martin in Zuid Holland

On 05/06/2022 15:07, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> In article <6bcf4d60-abf6-493d-9c3d-6c9f024cf91bn@googlegroups.com>, R.
> Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Well most of the jobs available outside hospitality are highly skilled,
>> whereas there was an extremely strong correlation between Leave voters
>> and low educational attainment (no A' levels - ONS - EC correlation
>> based on Census & vote). Apparently those without any qualifications
>> vote 2:1 for Leave, but that does not mean they could hack it as a
>> surgeon, ICT guru, TV aerial rigger or lorry driver).
>
> One of the big problems in the UK economy is the way Westminster Gov has
> systematically cut provison for FE training of skills.(1) Started when
> Milk-Snatcher decided to abolish the system of training levy boards that
> supported apprenticeships, etc. That used to be a potential route upwards
> in terms of employment for those who weren't successful at schools.
>
> (1) Preceeded by the foolishness of not really supporting Technical Schools
> because of the English obsession with 'Grammar Schools'. (And, perhaps,
> because a good tech ed requires more money per student.)

In practice the 'Techs' were really only for 11-plus failures, like the
Secondary Moderns. And real engineers are expected to have degrees.

--
Max Demian

On 06/06/2022 10:27 am, Martin wrote:

> "Jeff Gaines" <jgaines_newsid@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Martin wrote:

>>>>> I refuse to watch a TV station that employs the stinking turd in humanoid
>>>>> form know as "Farage".

>>>> We owe him an enormous debt, I'm pretty sure that without him we would
>>>> still be stuck in the EU.

>>> So it was him and not Boris who destroyed the UK economy?

>> Garbage. There are many outside factors affecting the economy and we are
>> now free to take our own action to deal with them.

>> Did you know that the number of unemployed is now about equal to the
>> number of job vacancies? Time for the unemployed to get on their bikes.

> Unemployed are low skilled. Job vacancies are for skilled.

There's nothing (except arrogance manifested as misplaced pride) to stop
"the skilled" from taking unskilled work as a stopgap. I remember taking
a temporary job felling trees and clearing shrubbery in the planned path
of a motorway in Cheshire, a really long time ago - more than fifty
years. It was exhausting and not very well-paid, but it was better than
claiming benefit.

AAMOF, that's the way the benefit system was designed to work.

> For years the EU was UK's main trading partner. Look at import export figures
> now.

On 05/06/2022 03:07 pm, Jim Lesurf wrote:
> In article <6bcf4d60-abf6-493d-9c3d-6c9f024cf91bn@googlegroups.com>, R.
> Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Well most of the jobs available outside hospitality are highly skilled,
>> whereas there was an extremely strong correlation between Leave voters
>> and low educational attainment (no A' levels - ONS - EC correlation
>> based on Census & vote). Apparently those without any qualifications
>> vote 2:1 for Leave, but that does not mean they could hack it as a
>> surgeon, ICT guru, TV aerial rigger or lorry driver).
>
> One of the big problems in the UK economy is the way Westminster Gov has
> systematically cut provison for FE training of skills.(1) Started when
> Milk-Snatcher decided to abolish the system of training levy boards that
> supported apprenticeships, etc. That used to be a potential route upwards
> in terms of employment for those who weren't successful at schools.
>
> (1) Preceeded by the foolishness of not really supporting Technical Schools
> because of the English obsession with 'Grammar Schools'. (And, perhaps,
> because a good tech ed requires more money per student.)

I don't know how many English and Welsh education authorities even
opened Technical High Schools, but it certainly wasn't many, whereas the
1944 Act authorised all relevant county-level authorities to provide Sec
Mod, Tech High and Grammar schools.

The Tech schools were not all vocationally-focused. They taught French,
German, History, Geography, English (fancy that!) and Mathematics in
addition to woodwork, metal work and other subjects. All up to O-Level
standard with a sixth-form for A-Level.

The City of Liverpool provided several such schools , but my
understanding is that this was very much an exception.

You can't blame a government of the 1980s for the very "right on"
Crosland policy of wrecking English education. It started in the 1960s
and was continued throughout the 1970s. The incoming 1979 government
actually stopped that rot, whereas you paint the picture the opposite
way round.

I served an apprenticeship and gained City and Guild certification at a
local technical college (not technical high school) on day release. Not
once did I or my employer interact with a "training levy board".

On 06/06/2022 10:58 am, Max Demian wrote:

> On 05/06/2022 15:07, Jim Lesurf wrote:
>> In article <6bcf4d60-abf6-493d-9c3d-6c9f024cf91bn@googlegroups.com>, R.
>> Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well most of the jobs available outside hospitality are highly skilled,
>>> whereas there was an extremely strong correlation between Leave voters
>>> and low educational attainment (no A' levels - ONS - EC correlation
>>> based on Census & vote).  Apparently those without any qualifications
>>> vote 2:1 for Leave, but that does not mean they could hack it as a
>>> surgeon, ICT guru, TV aerial rigger or lorry driver).
>>
>> One of the big problems in the UK economy is the way Westminster Gov has
>> systematically cut provison for FE training of skills.(1) Started when
>> Milk-Snatcher decided to abolish the system of training levy boards that
>> supported apprenticeships, etc. That used to be a potential route upwards
>> in terms of employment for those who weren't successful at schools.
>>
>> (1) Preceeded by the foolishness of not really supporting Technical
>> Schools
>> because of the English obsession with 'Grammar Schools'. (And, perhaps,
>> because a good tech ed requires more money per student.)
>
> In practice the 'Techs' were really only for 11-plus failures, like the
> Secondary Moderns. And real engineers are expected to have degrees.

Anyone wishing to proceed to a university to study for a B.Sc. in
engineering would have found it easier via a THS. There is a
long-standing (and essentially pointless) spat between those who regard
"engineer" as a label only for graduates (with lesser mortals being
"engineering workers") and those who do not adhere to such a purist view.

In those authorities where they were provided, THSs did not cater for
"11+ failures". Had that been the case, they would not have provided
education to O-Level and A-Level.

On 06/06/2022 in message
<0ab019b9-c0a7-46f6-bf22-e7afdbf6a8b9n@googlegroups.com> R. Mark Clayton
wrote:

>>I have no obligation to provide facts to support my view, who do you think
>>you are?
>
>You are quite right - you can believe the earth is flat if you like (NB I
>have seen the curve of the earth if you do), but if you choose to express
>this opinion in a public forum such as this you can expect two things: -

"Remember, the Flat Earth Society has members all around the globe."

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to get along without it.

On 06/06/2022 08:19, Jeff Layman wrote:
>
> As to the demographics of who did what in the each referendum, there is
> some interesting analysis here:
> <https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/07/31/the-referendums-of-1975-and-2016-illustrate-the-continuity-and-change-in-british-euroscepticism/>

The LSE blogs are usually pretty good, but perhaps not in this case -
graph after graph for 1975, but not a single one one for 2016, yet they
claim to be comparing the two.

And, besides, the vote has happened already, the current debate, or
rather wall of denial by certain people for whom this is a religion
rather than something about facts, is about what is happening now.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 06/06/2022 08:39, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> On 05/06/2022 in message <t7jbgg$k02$1@dont-email.me> Java Jive wrote:
>>
>> On 05/06/2022 22:44, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>
>>> Not sure who "we" is, do you have a split personality?
>>
>> The two people who are presenting you with FACTS relating to the
>> economic state of Britain which you are desperately trying to ignore
>> and pretend that you haven't seen.
>
> Do you have authority to speak for Mark Goodge?

WTF is he? Anyway, whoever he is, I don't need his authority to support
him.

> I am not interested in
> any facts you come up with,

Clearly, that's why you are making an arse of yourself by talking bollocks.

> I have my view, I am entitled to my view and
> you can take it or leave it.

But what you are not entitled to do is state your 'views' as though they
are facts, without being prepared to support them with facts, which is
actually what you are doing. If you wish to state your 'views' in
public, then you should expect to have to, and be able to, defend them,
otherwise they will be regarded merely as bigoted shit, which we don't
need any more of here.

>>> I note your view  "these things" are true, you are of course welcome
>>> to that view and free  to express it.
>>
>> I note that you still haven't produced a single shred of evidence to
>> support your views, while I and others have produced, now, at least 13
>> links to reports and government publications supporting ours.  Nobody
>> is fooled by your right-wing arsehole posturing that unpleasant
>> economic facts of life are merely the creation of left-wing media, and
>> your behavious makes you just another pathetic and unconvincing liar.
>
> I have no obligation to provide evidence, I have my view, I am entitled
> to my view and you can take it or leave it.

In public debate, if you state views which, as has happened, others then
challenge, you are expected to provide evidence in support of your
claims. Your failure to do so, but persistence in continuing arguing
without a shred of a case, just makes you look pathetic.

>>> I am delighted that we have regained our independence,  long may it
>>> last.
>>
>> We were independent before because as an independent nation we chose
>> to be part of the EU and signed its treaties  -  to which we should
>> have adhered  -  because we gained thereby far more than we gave up.
>> We have now gained an independence which is nominal only, and forsaken
>> those very real advantages which were the original reason for our
>> joining.  We are still dependent on the EU for around 50% of our
>> trade, but now on less favourable terms, and while we are indeed free
>> to trade with the rest of world, we were free to do so before anyway,
>> but while we were part of the EU we were stronger and could get better
>> deals than we can now as a single lone state:
>
> "We" did not choose to be part of the EU, "we" did vote to stay in the
> Common Market.

We signed the EU's treaties, and should have adhered to them.

>> I suggest you actually fucking bother to read  -  READ, MARK, LEARN,
>> and *INWARDLY DIGEST* as the old-fashioned educational saying has it
>> -  the many links that have already been provided to you.
>
> Why , I have my view, I am entitled to my view and you can take it or
> leave it.

As long as you don't state your views in public, you can believe any
fucking thing you like, but the moment you state something in public,
you should expect to have to justify it - that's just how public
debate works, get used to it. I note that you have consistently been
unable to justify your claims, while others have posted plenty of
evidence that completely contradicts them, so I and anyone else reading
this are entitled to assume simply that you're just another liar.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 06/06/2022 10:34, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> In article <0ab019b9-c0a7-46f6-bf22-e7afdbf6a8b9n@googlegroups.com>,
> R. Mark Clayton <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> You are quite right - you can believe the earth is flat if you like
>> (NB I have seen the curve of the earth if you do), but if you
>> choose to express this opinion in a public forum such as this you
>> can expect two things: -
>
>> 1. To be challenged to provide factual evidence to support your
>> view.
>>
>> and
>>
>> 2. Derision if you don't, particularly in the face of a large
>> volume of evidence to the contrary.
>
> Really. This from the man who once told us that whilst driving at
> speed in his car listening to the radio, he could clearly tell the
> difference in sound quality between CDs and LPs and when asked, told
> us this was not surface noise, just sound quality.

Mmmmm! From memory because it's not worth the bother to check, I rather
think that was someone else actually.

> Yes. people believe anything, even that surrendering control of our
> own country and any semblance of democracy to an unelected elite in
> Brussels is good idea.

TROLL! PROVEN LIE REPEATED!

As has already been proven months ago in this same thread, the EU's
system of government is at least as democratic as the UK's, and arguably
is more so.

> Just like signing up to the WHO pandemic
> control plan is a good idea. If that doesn't guarantee another
> pandemic very soon, nothing will.

Oh so that's the latest fake news now, is it? How absurd! Is there any
lie on earth that the shits you like to wallow with aren't prepared to
fabricate?

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 06/06/2022 10:29, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
> On 06/06/2022 in message
> <0ab019b9-c0a7-46f6-bf22-e7afdbf6a8b9n@googlegroups.com> R. Mark Clayton
> wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, 6 June 2022 at 08:42:09 UTC+1, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>
>>> On 05/06/2022 in message <t7jc3f$na7$1...@dont-email.me> Java Jive
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> So, as everyone knew all along, no *FACT*s to support your view.
>>>
>>> I have no obligation to provide facts to support my view, who do you
>>> think you are?

Someone who calls out liars like you. If you are not prepared to
support your views in public, then that's a pretty clear indication to
others that they're not worth anything, and that you're just lying.
Your continuing to argue without supplying any evidence is further proof
of that.

>> You are quite right - you can believe the earth is flat if you like
>> (NB I have seen the curve of the earth if you do), but if you choose
>> to express this opinion in a public forum such as this you can expect
>> two things: -
>>
>> 1. To be challenged to provide factual evidence to support your view.
>> and
>> 2. Derision if you don't, particularly in the face of a large volume
>> of evidence to the contrary.
>
> No problems but I don't care about either.

You perhaps might care when your posting reputation start to suffer as a
result.

>> Basically - put up or shut up!
>
> I have no obligation to do either except it's off topic for the group so
> the three of us (sorry I think I referred to you incorrectly) have an
> obligation to shut up. Nobody has an obligation to put  up of course.

By the normal rules of public debate, you lose your argument if you
don't even attempt to support it, and as you have manifestly failed to
provide even a shred of evidence in support of it, you have indeed lost,
yet here you are, still trying to argue, which means that now you are
trolling. As the other man said, it's time for you to put up or shut up!

>> PS it will be interesting having lied to win the referendum whether
>> the Brextremists can now come up with a liar convincing enough that
>> people will believe it is a success.  Most people do not keep their
>> fingers in their ears.
>
> That i just an allegation put forward by snowflake remoaners who have
> been brought up to believe that there are no losers.

That is just pathetic dribble by someone who has lost an argument.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

In article <t7ia2u$8tu$1@dont-email.me>, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It's time to move on. The damage has been done. Time to consider how to
> fix things.

I'd agree. The snag is that some right-whinge people still can't face the
fact that Brexit *has* - and still *is* - causing various problems despite
the promises made of a Golden Age arriving via Unicorns. One reason for
this is the sheer incompetence of the BloJo Government, covered by their
fairy-tale promises.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
biog http://jcgl.orpheusweb.co.uk/history/ups_and_downs.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html