coldel

Oh I agree wholeheartedly mate. If they believed as politicians all these benefits were going to come with exiting then even though I didnt vote for it I fully expect to see them. £350m a week was a lie, it needs to be called out so people in future are not so gullible They promised an increase in spending on the NHS this year by 4% They promised to remove 5% VAT on fuel bills this year Begin the process of renegotiating trade rules to the Norway model as they promised

Yes lets get on with it, although I do genuinely believe they do not know what to do next. Interesting you refer to it as a majority? Imagine lining up 30 people in a row, put a gap halfway then get one person to step across that gap. The swing was tiny in % terms, it was a marginal win really.

To be honest I hope Article 50 gets invoked next week I cant put up with more smoke and mirrors from politicians talking rubbish. Lets get on with it, move to some sort of hybrid Norway model, get back to complying with EU regulation, and allowing movement of people and keep the economic uncertainty to an absolute minimum.

The last vote was based on Scotland wanting to stay in the UK given we were in the EU. Scotland had a 62% preference to stay in the EU. I would hazard a guess that the combination of both would lead to a vote Out of the UK if they went again. By all means, it won't be easy on them either, but if the voice of the people speak just as they did Thursday...

Probably because of the above, as Scotland will need to disentangle from the UK and depending on when it takes place, either remain in the EU or have to re-insert itself which are two different scenarios. At least she is putting in the leg work to find out how all of it will actually work to be fair is a sensible approach. As much as I wanted Cameron to do well for the UK, he has literally overseen years of austerity (ok not his fault), destabilisation of the UK economy for who knows how long and a break from the EU, along with potentially conflict in Ireland, and Scotland leaving the UK. Not the sort of legacy I would imagine he had in mind...

Geometry done today over at Wheels in Motion, great set up and bunch of guys there - anyway turns out the toe in was quite bad on the front, so would have eaten through my front tyres pretty quickly. Anyway all sorted now and in great shape.

Problem with Scotland is that they have an official mandate as part of the previous referendum that any significant constitutional change in UK law (such as leaving the EU) means she has every legal right to put this into play and request another through parliament. It's not cut and dry though that Indy would win, so her challenge is when does she run it (and I would say its 95% there that it will) does she take a chance and build up support for Independence and do it last minute or does she call it earlier and then give herself more time on the other side to sort Scotland out sooner rather than later separating it from the UK.

But more than 50% is not EU based immigration, we could stop that tomorrow if we wanted to, so ask your leaders why not? A lot of immigration has been driven by the middle eastern uprising which happened years ago (which we encouraged) i.e. syria. There is a big proposal on the table in the EU this year in how to control that, but we will now not have a voice at the table on this. The EU will reform, it would anyway regardless of our result. France is going right wing, they are not stupid. Unfortunately now we are at their whim if we adopt a Norwegian model and instead have to canvas most likely Ireland to take our concerns to a body which influences our trading rules. For me, the loss is the loss of voice, we actually have less control in the world economy than before.

But the definition of a free market, is competition. I think if Cameron had delivered, in laymans terms, the benefits of the EU and the potential repercussions of exiting we wouldn't be where we are now. In a economic flux, it wont be armageddon, you have to ignore Osbornes tax claims etc, but it wont be easy. If they had focused on explaining stuff in easy to grasp terms there might have been a moment of 'ummmm' rather than a hate/want divide. The ironic thing is that the people that are likely to be most affected by this in a negative way are those that voted leave, and those that voted stay in London are the ones that are going to have restructure entire corporations to ensure the economic fallout is impacting us in as little a way as possible.

This guy nails most of it. I don't agree with everything he says, but most of it I do. If you're not too Brexit fatigued, it's well worth 10 minutes http://www.theguardi...ity-westminster I actually skim read it in 1 minute, and its about bang on. No denying that Thatcher started the class divide that has never been addressed. That said, the opportunities have always been there for those that have the application, as a country we often hold up as a testament to how great we are when the little guy becomes a great guy, but thats there for all of use to achieve, if a polish guy comes in as a builder and undercuts you, you have to respond, its a global economy and you have to think a bit harder about business rather than just expect government policy to provide artificial protectionist measures.

I sat and watching on facebook as a woman who was born and bred here who has claimed benefits all her life, with three kids, and a council house all funded by the state, with a husband who was unemployed, who spent Friday fishing, put a union jack on her profile picture saying 'proud to be british' and well done on voting out. Thing is, benefits numbers show there are ten of those sorts of people born here for every one of those immigrants. Its pointless trying to put those individual cases forwards as an example. Actually most immigrants are of a younger working age and their tax payments are funding our ageing population doing jobs British people have no interest in.

Aye its a fair comment. Whilst we remain in a flux, who is going to take the risk? I was sat with the MD of an energy firm tonight who already said multiple billion pound deals are now on hold. Whilst we sit here trying to muddle our way through this we lose ground on recovering the economy, we were on the way back every economic indicator showed that, now we have to wait 2 years for trade deals to be sorted, it could end up being much longer, in which time investment will be tentative, growth must slow, jobs and salaries must be impacted and all of that is not good news. If anyone can show me a clear example of where a countries economy was in flux and they did alright out of it I am happy to take that on board. So the question goes out again, if we adopt the Norway model, which means adhering to EU regulation and being part of the EEA where freedom of movement is a given, what have we voted for?

So why vote out? What was so offensive about the EU that half the country decided to go? I still don't hear a coherent answer. If its not immigration, not that the EU was holding back the UK economy, what was it? Why has no one even questioned that the 100 day plan the Leave campaign put out on their website a week before the vote been completely disregarded by Boris Johnson when he said lets do nothing now. Apparently we were meant to in the first 100 days have enacted the Article 50, raised spending on the NHS by £100m a week and reduced fuel bills, within 24 hours all that is now not happening - yet we all sit here doing nothing - all the propositions were a joke. I was actually up for voting out, and wanted a reason to, the actions of political people in such a short space of time have confirmed that there were more personal agendas on the committee than thoughts on the benefits of the country which is why I decided not to. Personally I feel completely disengaged from the whole thing - as you might be able to tell I felt passionately about this being a well thought through process but it seems like so many people decided regardless.

Oh I accept it, most of my family were in the Leave camp. This was an economic vote but some people saw it as something else, and tried in no way to understand what they were voting for. That really is unfortunate. And I would disagree, life is about making your way in the best way possible, I understand that people took a stand against the EU, but when asked to articulate it are generally left wanting, by some margin.

Just back from some beers, with a guy who voted out and a guy who wanted to stay. It was interesting... The other guy who voted stay accused him of economic vandalism. And then challenged him to state what positive he expected out of the decision which he answered 'fed up of federalism' which when asked to explain he couldn't. Sad thing is that we are meant to be known as a liberal, open minded and progressive culture and this feels like a step back for me. There is no economic benefit to be had ( a Norway agreement puts us back where we are now except we cannot influence the decision enforced upon us) and now Europe thinks we are a bunch of closed minded racists (which of course we are not but that perception is now out there). Bit weird that so many friends and family are so divided on this issue. Not comfortable with it at all.

Ha, what say do we have really?

Obviously tiny proportion, but bloody hell how can you be so stupid as to do a tv interview and say that.

How many younger people bothered to vote? Usually they are the ones that do not turn out...

Have you got the boot strut brace as well? Makes a lot of difference to handling.

the accusation is granted Note in the video Farage mentions £10bn to spend, pretty sure if you divide £10bn by 52 you don't arrive at £350m per week still enough people fell for it so it did its job. Surprised the interviewers were not savvy enough to pick him up on it either.

Its actually not a million miles away from the populous definitions of millennials, baby boomers, generation x - but as you rightly say it should have run from 18-34 then 35 to 50 to make sense. Looking at the data I suspect it would tell a similar story if you shuffled it around that way. There seemed to be a very clear demographic and age breakdown of who voted where and probably a clear social class profile as well.

I have resisted posting up other peoples opinion till this stage but this is worth a read if you want a very quick top line (and fairly objective) view of what might transpire. I guess the very last paragraph is where we will end up, but our situation is that we left and probably alienated ourselves from influential people in the EU unlike Norway, so we could find some tough 'surprise turns' which is the point in the last line. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/06/5-questions-for-britain-and-europe-after-the-brexit-vote

I thought that The Norway model included free movement? In any case any products that we sell to The EU will have to comply to EU regulations/standards. The Swiss model is very similar. So will The EU make us a special case or will be able to negotiate a Norway style relationship without free movement? A lot of experts say it could go 2 ways either they need our business so badly that they'll offer us a good deal or they'll punish us to dissuade other countries from leaving. The other issue is what happens before we actually leave The EU, will there be an overwhelming rush of migrants getting in before our doors are locked? Or will they think that The U.K is no longer an attractive place to come to? Pete Actually given that half of immigration is non EU this vote really doesn't cover it off fully, we could have closed the doors on half of immigration any time we wanted. I said previously if people are voting on one principle of immigration to exit the EU personally I think that is pretty naive. What is pretty much not realised by many who supported Leave is that many of the EU directives are there to create a level playing field to protect the UK from being underpriced by cheap labour produced insufficient quality goods by other countries in the EU who traditionally could have taken advantage. We will always as a country produce quality goods (ok speculation there but probably a reasonable one) and continue to abide by these rules independently, we will also most likely have this written into any trade agreement like the Norway model. Freedom of movement is still a requirement (which is one of the four principles of the EEA which Norway are part of) yes. So if we sign a Norway deal, where we are obliged formally to comply with EU regulation and the principle of freedom of movement as part of the EEA, have we 'taken back control' ?

As for FB feeds I think you guys seriously need to revise your friends list and who you surround yourself with, I am not seeing anything of the sort on my FB page - so therefore it cannot be FACT (come on guys surely you cannot come to a factual conclusion of 17m odd people based on a feed on your own social media page, seriously!)

If you can get a genuine GTR rear wing they are actually adjustable