[Will Hunt]

Though the farming lobby is strong with the Tory party (stronger than the environmental lobby) so it might end up with some sort of horrible farming free for all.

But Tom, that nice Brexit: The Movie video told me that the lobeeists were only in the EU. I fought that voting Out would mean all the lo bees and technocats and face less beurocats would go away and leave us alone. OMG I'm confused lol  lol

[tomtom]

I think its wrong to blame leave voters for the rise in racist incidents.
But this is happening due to the leave result empowering people with racist views.

Therein lies the problem -- they are linked yet not linked.

This is the issue with referendums - only yes or no choice. No chance to vote for BNP/BritainFirst or whatever if you so choose. So all the racist wankers are lumped in with people voting leave for beliefs on governance, or economics. This, I have to add, was not helped by a leave campaign that didn't shy from playing the immigration card - that went along a spectrum from "I love immigrants, but.." from Boris, to Farages poster. In other words from dog whistle to blatant racism.

[tomtom]

Anyway, no one has stated the fucking obvious yet...

BUY ROCK BOOTS NOW... their price is always linked to the Eu/$$ to the ££ rate - and after the most recent shipping container of 5:10 , Scarpa and Sportiva goodies have sold out the next one will be more expensive...

[petejh]

Personally I'm thinking of investing in anti-depressant and anti-anxiety pharma.


TT - referendums don't have to be binary though. They can have more than two choices. And even with a binary referendum, the choice could have possibly been more nuanced than simple 'leave' / 'remain'.

[tomtom]

Personally I'm thinking of investing in anti-depressant and anti-anxiety pharma.


TT - referendums don't have to be binary though. They can have more than two choices. And even with a binary referendum, the choice could have possibly been more nuanced than simple 'leave' / 'remain'.

Actually that is really hard. And then makes the result VERY critical on the wording of the questions (said from the perspective of having some experience of writing/teaching about writing questionnaire questions). How would you have asked the question differently? - would you have three, four, five, or six questions? Then would you have to say that there can only be a result if one question gets more than 50% of the vote? Would that be fair or not? It quickly balloons into a whole different situation... (and I'm only using a couple of example questions above). What happens if you use a complicated word in your question? Does that discriminate against people who might vote a certain way? You either have to make the question very very simple and straightforward, or use a different decision making process (e.g. a Government!!)

[petejh]

Have a read up on past referendums in various countries. It's entirely possible that with a bit more political craft this referendum could have been framed differently.

[tomtom]

Have a read up on past referendums in various countries. It's entirely possible that with a bit more political craft this referendum could have been framed differently.

OK - create a better question for us.

[Oldmanmatt]

Have a read up on past referendums in various countries. It's entirely possible that with a bit more political craft this referendum could have been framed differently.

OK - create a better question for us.

Why?
Ffs Why!?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tomtom]

because I want to see if Pete can come up with a better question(s)!w

Anyway, have you stocked up on chalk before the prices rocket OMM?

[psychomansam]

EU superstate please
Remain happily
Remain but complain
Don't Care
Brexit with cuddles
Full Brexit - separate beds
Throw out the n**gers.

[galpinos]

One positive of Brexit is the removal of the CAP - that I don't think has particularly helped our environment or farmers by creating a very false market for agriculture. My worry though, is that CAP provides some form of stability (I wont say protection - as what it does is very subjective) in the environment - and we would need to have suitable and decent regulations put in place. Though the farming lobby is strong with the Tory party (stronger than the environmental lobby) so it might end up with some sort of horrible farming free for all.

Firstly, Will we actually get rid of the CAP or just replace it with the UKAP which is nothing but the CAP in a dashing union flag cloak? There was plenty of promises to the farmers to "maintain their subsidies". I realise quite a few of the Brexit promises have gone the way of Cinderella's coach and horses but the farmers that benefit are the big farms with a lot of land (Like the Queen and her €500k handout, 80% of the CAP payments go to 20% of the farms) and they are the ones who will be lobbying (and in bed with the Tories).

[petejh]

Have a read up on past referendums in various countries. It's entirely possible that with a bit more political craft this referendum could have been framed differently.

OK - create a better question for us.

No chance - I'm too busy, I'm not a civil servant or a politician, something like that takes time and thought. How about you try?

[tomtom]

Have a read up on past referendums in various countries. It's entirely possible that with a bit more political craft this referendum could have been framed differently.

OK - create a better question for us.

No chance - I'm too busy, I'm not a civil servant or a politician, something like that takes time and thought. How about you try?

I'm not clever enough to do that. But as you'd read up about it I thought you'd have a try. Oh well.

[slackline]

Creating surveys is, as tomtom has already intimated, not as straight-forward as it might seem and simply listing the options can easily lead to bias.

Journal of Survey Statistics and Methodology would be a starting point for researching the known problems and how to avoid them.

[Oldmanmatt]

because I want to see if Pete can come up with a better question(s)!w

Anyway, have you stocked up on chalk before the prices rocket OMM?

No,
I mean that's a better question...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[petejh]

If you're not clever enough TT than neither am I.

I'm only clever enough to have spent 5 minutes reading that referendums don't have to be and aren't always binary; and that there are plenty of examples of referendums where the choices are more nuanced than the one we've just had.

Which makes your suggestion that referendums are either yes/no- ''This is the issue with referendums - only yes or no choice'' - incorrect.

[Fultonius]

One positive of Brexit is the removal of the CAP - that I don't think has particularly helped our environment or farmers by creating a very false market for agriculture. My worry though, is that CAP provides some form of stability (I wont say protection - as what it does is very subjective) in the environment - and we would need to have suitable and decent regulations put in place. Though the farming lobby is strong with the Tory party (stronger than the environmental lobby) so it might end up with some sort of horrible farming free for all.

Firstly, Will we actually get rid of the CAP or just replace it with the UKAP which is nothing but the CAP in a dashing union flag cloak? There was plenty of promises to the farmers to "maintain their subsidies". I realise quite a few of the Brexit promises have gone the way of Cinderella's coach and horses but the farmers that benefit are the big farms with a lot of land (Like the Queen and her €500k handout, 80% of the CAP payments go to 20% of the farms) and they are the ones who will be lobbying (and in bed with the Tories).

I would link to Monbiot's Guardian article...but I'm sure everyone can google. My, albeit limited and most likely biased take on it is - the big landowners take a major whack of the CAP, then sublet out their poorer land to tenant farmers.

So the worker still gets fucked, while the rich just keep on gettin' richer. Someone has to pay for those range rovers and public schools, I suppose.

E.G. The Honerable Robert Other Ivor Windsor-Clive, Earl of Plymouth, last year received over £600,000.... he's already worth £30m - rob from the poor and pay to the rich.

[slackline]

If you're not clever enough TT than neither am I.

I'm only clever enough to have spent 5 minutes reading that referendums don't have to be and aren't always binary; and that there are plenty of examples of referendums where the choices are more nuanced than the one we've just had.

Which makes your suggestion that referendums are either yes/no- ''This is the issue with referendums - only yes or no choice'' - incorrect.

Given one of the major arguments of the "No" campaign in the "Alternative Vote" referendum was that such a system of voting is too complicated for the electorate it seems unlikely to me that a multi-choice referendum would be supported by those who won that referendum.

So yes possible, but it seems unlikely to happen to me.

[Johnny Brown]

Pete's quite right. I can't remember exactly how the PR/AV referendum was framed but they did their best to make the alternatives to FPTP unattractive.

What should have been thought about a bit more is how to deal with outcome. Historically such mega changes of policy are not taken on such slim majorities. When we joined, it was 67% for. This wouldn't be over if it had been 48-52 the other way, as Farage said. It isn't over now. We're in a standoff. The tories think they have got enough to push for the concessions they didn't get in February, but Europe know they haven't got the majority to push it through, and are playing as hard as possible to make an example of us. Brexit will not happen unless there's another referendum with a stronger mandate.

[tomtom]

If you're not clever enough TT than neither am I.

I'm only clever enough to have spent 5 minutes reading that referendums don't have to be and aren't always binary; and that there are plenty of examples of referendums where the choices are more nuanced than the one we've just had.

I'm flattered - but you needn't xx

[webbo]

Just two points: I've not called them fascists, or racists, or dictatorial, but rather people who have emboldened those types. That's a very different thing. I totally accept they voted for very good reasons - in fact I wrote that too - but I get that saying  that good motivations can lead to awful outcomes and then suggesting they are in some very small way responsible for those outcomes makes people uncomfortable. It's the whole means and ends thing isn't it? If you get what you want, but at the price of your fellow countrymen and women feeling frightened to leave the house - perhaps there was a problem with the way you got it.

And do I believe this shit was there already? Some of it, but that assumes a set level of racism in society. I'm not sure I believe that but I could be wrong. There's no doubt several PhDs worth of work unpicking those sentences.

Anyhow, we now have a soiled and grim element to our national culture but that's okay because no ones making laws on kettles.

I don't where you live or frequent but I am staggered that you are not aware of the levels of racism in our society. I come across it at work from patients seeing an Asian doctor , you come across it in industry and in country pubs listening to the local farm workers.
I'm sure there are many more examples.

[kac]

How about the example of the EDL or a similar moron group holding their demonstrations. Been going on for a few years now in south Yorkshire. Sean - I find your argument about as sophisticated as trumps when he says that your sympathising with or if you like 'enabling' terrorists if you vote Clinton.

[galpinos]

One positive of Brexit is the removal of the CAP - that I don't think has particularly helped our environment or farmers by creating a very false market for agriculture. My worry though, is that CAP provides some form of stability (I wont say protection - as what it does is very subjective) in the environment - and we would need to have suitable and decent regulations put in place. Though the farming lobby is strong with the Tory party (stronger than the environmental lobby) so it might end up with some sort of horrible farming free for all.

Firstly, Will we actually get rid of the CAP or just replace it with the UKAP which is nothing but the CAP in a dashing union flag cloak? There was plenty of promises to the farmers to "maintain their subsidies". I realise quite a few of the Brexit promises have gone the way of Cinderella's coach and horses but the farmers that benefit are the big farms with a lot of land (Like the Queen and her €500k handout, 80% of the CAP payments go to 20% of the farms) and they are the ones who will be lobbying (and in bed with the Tories).

I would link to Monbiot's Guardian article...but I'm sure everyone can google. My, albeit limited and most likely biased take on it is - the big landowners take a major whack of the CAP, then sublet out their poorer land to tenant farmers.

So the worker still gets fucked, while the rich just keep on gettin' richer. Someone has to pay for those range rovers and public schools, I suppose.

E.G. The Honerable Robert Other Ivor Windsor-Clive, Earl of Plymouth, last year received over £600,000.... he's already worth £30m - rob from the poor and pay to the rich.

I know the state of the funding, I just feel that although this an opportunity to reform it, the people on the receiving end of the subsidies are the kind of people who have the ear of the Tory party so are likely to continue getting them.

[stone]

Like most people who voted Leave, immigration wasn't my main consideration http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
That said, I thought that voting leave was compatible with my liberal outlook and enthusiasm for a multicultural UK.
I don't see how a points-based immigration policy can be cast as more xenophobic than a system that favours Europeans. If we are happy with say immigration of say 500000 people a year, then the consequence of those being via a points based system is very different than if they were via free movement. A points based system could facilitate sharing of expertise around the world. By contrast, free movement can result in the toxic situation of many jobs descending into pay and conditions where "British people won't do them". We then have the dysfunctional situation where we depend on a constant flow of exploited new migrants.
IMO good immigration is where people are moving to be with their family and friends and/or doing work that makes the best use of their talents. Bad immigration is where people are homesick and doing work less significant than they would be doing where they have moved from. Sadly many migrants are caught up in just such a messed up situation -driven by money.

[Johnny Brown]

Some pertinent statistics for people's reactions:

    Those who said they paid little or no attention to politics voted to leave the EU by 58% to 42%.

    More than three quarters (77%) of those who voted to remain thought “the decision we make in the referendum could have disastrous consequences for us as a country if we get it wrong”.

    More than two thirds (69%) of leavers, by contrast, thought the decision “might make us a bit better or worse off as a country, but there probably isn’t much in it either way”.