|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
United States43971 Posts
On August 02 2017 04:10 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 04:08 KwarK wrote:On August 02 2017 04:03 Sermokala wrote:On August 02 2017 03:47 KwarK wrote:
It's pretty unlikely that the grandfather of the average SC2 player would have been old enough to have fought in WWII. You'd need two generations of having kids late for that to be true. We're now 72 years from the end of WWII, you'd have to be 90 to have been 18 in 1945. 96 to have been 18 in 1939. For some reason people like to insist that current retirees are the WWII generation but it's simply untrue. My granddad died in Normandy and my great uncle died on the beaches. It happened. And I have no complaints about how either of them voted in Brexit. Most retirees aren't 90 though. The WWII generation and the current retiree generation are distinct things with very little overlap. Oh god no they weren't British they were a generation removed from germany. I would imagine the draft hit younger people in WW2 in the UK more then it did other places. I'm just saying the draft hit people outside of protected crafts from 20-40 in most countries or so.
I didn't think they were British. Also them not being British wasn't the main reason I suspected they didn't vote in Brexit. Their deaths in Normandy was.
My point was that the WWII generation, by and large, is dead. It's not their votes that people complain about.
|
On August 02 2017 04:12 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 04:02 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2017 03:57 Ghostcom wrote:On August 02 2017 03:51 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2017 03:47 KwarK wrote:
It's pretty unlikely that the grandfather of the average SC2 player would have been old enough to have fought in WWII. You'd need two generations of having kids late for that to be true. We're now 72 years from the end of WWII, you'd have to be 90 to have been 18 in 1945. 96 to have been 18 in 1939. For some reason people like to insist that current retirees are the WWII generation but it's simply untrue. SC2 player, sure. BW and before, totally possible. But my grandfather died two years ago at 90+ years old. On August 02 2017 03:43 Ghostcom wrote:
We are like 5 posts away from "BABY BOOMERS FUCKED UP THE WORLD FOR ALL OF US" and "OLD PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO VOTE BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO DIE SOON ANYWAY". And young people should respect their elders that had to walk up hill both ways to school and didn’t have Iphones. Well people sure as shit shouldn't call others egoistic based on an single answer to a poll with likely only "yes" and "no" as an answer... And while we are at it: You should probably start apologizing for your voting as well. Every single time anyone votes, regardless of who we vote for, we will negatively impact someone (in most cases we don't know them personally). The only remarkable thing about your example is that your brother apparently lacks conviction or voted ignorantly. Yes, you should apologize if how you voted ending up negatively impacting someone. We should all have the respect for our fellow citizens to acknowledge their hardships and that we may have contributed to them, even if we didn’t mean to. I'm very curios: Have you ever actually apologized to anyone for how you voted? Also: would it ever make you change your vote? EDIT: For example - I would like an apology for you voting Obama in 2012. The man has literally incurred a loss of 14 USD because I had to apply for an ESTA (free until Obama changed it).
First answer: Yes. I know people who had their healthcare costs go up because of the ACA and I said have said I’m sorry that happened. I felt it was best to support it and my family needs the security of healthcare coverage.
Second: In that case, no. But acknowledging my decisions have consequences does not mean I’m required to change them.
I am sorry that you had to pay $14 and the hardship it has brought on you. I hope someday you will recover and I hope I can vote to make that happen.
|
What is the difference between you (voted for ACA) and those who would vote for BREXIT regardless of it having an influence on the jobsituation of themselves or their kin then? Aren't you both just voting for what you think is the right direction of the country?
What is it precisely you apologize for? Your vote? Or the impact that it had? If it is the latter (which would certainly be reasonable), then truly I'm befuddled by your animosity towards those that answered "yes" to the poll - as surely they don't wish for such consequences (just like you didn't when you voted for ACA), but are willing to accept them as they think it is the right direction for the country (however much we might disagree with them and bardtown).
|
I apologized for the negative impact, since it wasn’t my intent and I didn’t want people’s health care costs to go up. I differentiate that opinion from the poll, which is abstract. I think the poll would be differ if they for the person to pick a close family member or spouse. Or required them to confront a specific issue like “this family will be homeless”.
|
It was literally part of the ACA that healthcare costs would go up. Anyone who has ever singned an insurance knew that. The vote on ACA was far more informed on the consequences of cost than the vote on BREXIT was informed on the consequences for employment (we still don't know). I'm certain every single one of those polled would answer it wasn't their intent with BREXIT to have people lose their jobs - their intent was to leave EU. Your argument for animosity towards these people is textbook hypocritical.
|
That criticism is valid. I am being to harsh on the people that responded. I do feel there is an over arcing tone of dismissal of the stay voter’s worries and that colored my impression of them. Along with some of the posters in this thread.
|
Allow me to commend you for acknowledging it. Respect. I think overall we could all be better at trying to understand those we disagree with and acknowledge their concerns and worries.
|
On August 02 2017 06:04 Ghostcom wrote:
Allow me to commend you for acknowledging it. Respect. I think overall we could all be better at trying to understand those we disagree with and acknowledge their concerns and worries.
It is tough. The valid economic concerns that a lot of rural voters have in both the US and UK have been “infected” with xenophobia and bigotry. The people pushing the xenophic narrative are doing everything in their power to intermingle it with these economic concerns. It is a toxic brand of politic that I’m not sure our generation was ever equipped to deal with. We will learn, but in the US I can’t help but feel we are woefully ill-prepared to deal with it. Especially with the real economic problems facing our country. And from what I can see, there are parallels in the UK as well.
|
It's of course a loaded question to put the consequences of Brexit in terms of personal effect on the family. Thinking about "the economy" in the abstract is, for the common man, different than thinking about self and family. But frankly it's the same reality - and some people are willing to acknowledge that.
There are things that matter more than economics and especially short term economics. It's not reasonable to just assume the worst about people because an economic hit is acceptable for the purposes of a desired result.
|
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/amber-rudd-claims-apos-real-092951414.html
“Who uses WhatsApp because it is end-to-end encrypted, rather than because it is an incredibly user-friendly and cheap way of staying in touch with friends and family?
“So this is not about asking the companies to break encryption or create so called ‘back doors’.
“Companies are constantly making trade-offs between security and ‘usability’, and it is here where our experts believe opportunities may lie.
“Real people often prefer ease of use and a multitude of features to perfect, unbreakable security.”
Just fuck off Rudd and take your authoritarian boss with you.
|
On August 02 2017 07:16 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 06:04 Ghostcom wrote:
Allow me to commend you for acknowledging it. Respect. I think overall we could all be better at trying to understand those we disagree with and acknowledge their concerns and worries. It is tough. The valid economic concerns that a lot of rural voters have in both the US and UK have been “infected” with xenophobia and bigotry. The people pushing the xenophobic narrative are doing everything in their power to intermingle it with these economic concerns. It is a toxic brand of politic that I’m not sure our generation was ever equipped to deal with. We will learn, but in the US I can’t help but feel we are woefully ill-prepared to deal with it. Especially with the real economic problems facing our country. And from what I can see, there are parallels in the UK as well.
It wasn't infected. It was left to rot by the politicians and now it is a gangrene, too late to change their minds, and influential enough to elect leaders and cannibalize the political fabric. Politicians can preach that globalization is going to happen no matter what, and automatization comes next, but if you don't do something to alleviate and attempt to smooth out a transition for those who are being left behind, it will come back to bite you in the butt in whatever way it presents itself as such.
|
On July 29 2017 01:05 KwarK wrote:
London has a huge advantage of already being established. As I've said here a dozen times already, financial centres can't just up and move. Individual companies can but they rely upon an existing interconnected ecosystem of related financial services firms, a ready supply of experienced labour, and an economic/legislative infrastructure designed with them in mind. It's the same reason that despite the insane costs of being based in California (corporate taxes, high costs of living and so forth), Silicon Valley is still Silicon Valley.
Given an unrelenting pressure and enough time another European hub could grow to replace London. Absolutely. It could definitely happen. Hell, it could happen even if the UK stayed in the EU. And probably would, Britain's star is fading. However the idea that it's going to happen overnight is silly. The degree of interconnected and interdependent systems that keep these companies in place is difficult to explain. For two hundred years London has drawn the best and brightest from around the world to itself and encouraged them to make a home there. It's not getting transplanted easily.
On July 29 2017 01:29 bardtown wrote:
What reason do they have to be there now, as opposed to being in Paris? Those are the reasons they have to stay. Infrastructure, capital, business friendly politics, common law, etc. London is world competitive, so in the same way that Brits will continue to buy German cars if they are a bit more expensive, Europeans will continue to use British financial services if they are a bit more expensive. A huge proportion of their trade is already outside the EU, btw. It's a global industry, with global businesses, and none of London's peers are inside the EU. Time zones are also important. There will always be a European trading hub, and as it stands every other financial centre in Europe is decades behind London in terms of infrastructure. And with regards to the ultramodern tech that is going to shape the coming decades the difference is only more pronounced. Restrict access to these services and you make your entire economy less competitive in a single move.
It's actually very simple for the EU to maximise profit/minimise damage. Everybody knows that free trade is beneficial. But if they allow free trade without free movement/legal supremacy then it will be blatant that the UK made the right decision in leaving, because we will have achieved our objectives while simultaneously saving money, and every other north-western EU state will want the same deal. So punishment is obligatory, despite the fact that limiting free trade or whatever else they come up with will also hurt the EU.
Sorry for late reply ( I would literally sold my liver for 25 hours day).
KwarK I never said that they will just "up and move", let alone that it will happen overnight, week, month or year, but... dripping already started and it doesnt seem like stopping anytime soon. I like your Silicon Valley example - now how long do you think Silicon Valley would remain Silicon Valley if California decided to proclaim itself independent country??
Also I cant help but notice that your argument basically comes down to "it was always like that" and while it is perfectly fine argument as long as status quo is maintained (contrary to you KwarK i dont believe any other EU city would replace London if UK stayed in EU- there would be no reason to it) it is not valid if circumstances change so dramatically.
And as for "best and brightest" once real wages get low enough people will live UK in large numbers and best and brightest will be one of the first to do so because ... well they are best and brightest.
Also as i mentioned somewhere before, people (and with it skill, talent, expertise) are easiest transferable commodity in the world.
Now Bardtown I believe above answers part of you post, will try to answer rest of it.
Financial Services are not cars, or apples that you go and get them wherever you like most and most Europeans wont be using London - for example why you wont insure your car in US or Congo? it is cheaper than in UK.
As for "It's actually very simple for the EU to maximise profit/minimise damage. Everybody knows that free trade is beneficial." I cant stress this enough - there is no such thing as truly "free trade" even inside EU. Try to buy marijuana in Netherlands and sell it legally in UK. Same apply for everything else be it chlorinated chicken, or cyanide feed sheep (not a real thing and probably banned everywhere in the world  ). Lets say you'll get free trade deal with EU and US, who is to ensure that you are not selling any of the above in the EU?? Who will be there to make you accountable if you will?? No legal supremacy means pretty much no free trade deal as you would be able to do whatever you please in any country without regards to any laws in this country. Also: ECJ so bad we will get rid of it. We will have trade deal with US right after Brexit. You may not be aware of this but any trade deal you will get with US will involve ISDS, what means you will basically replace legal body with corporate court. Now lets say in 40 or so years you will decide to join EU (not saying you will - just example) You will pay every foreign company affected by this decision (pretty much any foreign company) so much monetary damage that UK will go bankrupt pretty much overnight. But hey - you got rid of ECJ.
|
On August 02 2017 07:26 LegalLord wrote:
It's of course a loaded question to put the consequences of Brexit in terms of personal effect on the family. Thinking about "the economy" in the abstract is, for the common man, different than thinking about self and family. But frankly it's the same reality - and some people are willing to acknowledge that.
There are things that matter more than economics and especially short term economics. It's not reasonable to just assume the worst about people because an economic hit is acceptable for the purposes of a desired result.
A little more charity on the motivations of the 65+ demographic would go a long way.
|
On August 03 2017 21:24 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 07:26 LegalLord wrote:
It's of course a loaded question to put the consequences of Brexit in terms of personal effect on the family. Thinking about "the economy" in the abstract is, for the common man, different than thinking about self and family. But frankly it's the same reality - and some people are willing to acknowledge that.
There are things that matter more than economics and especially short term economics. It's not reasonable to just assume the worst about people because an economic hit is acceptable for the purposes of a desired result. A little more charity on the motivations of the 65+ demographic would go a long way.
The irony of the retired telling those still working who voted against leaving that Brexit is worth their jobs is palpable.
|
On August 03 2017 23:03 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2017 21:24 Danglars wrote:On August 02 2017 07:26 LegalLord wrote:
It's of course a loaded question to put the consequences of Brexit in terms of personal effect on the family. Thinking about "the economy" in the abstract is, for the common man, different than thinking about self and family. But frankly it's the same reality - and some people are willing to acknowledge that.
There are things that matter more than economics and especially short term economics. It's not reasonable to just assume the worst about people because an economic hit is acceptable for the purposes of a desired result. A little more charity on the motivations of the 65+ demographic would go a long way. The irony of the retired telling those still working who voted against leaving that Brexit is worth their jobs is palpable.
So are you willing to levy the same criticism for the smaller, albeit far from insignificant, younger folk who feel the same way?
|
Funny discussion over irrelevant poll. It was hypothetical question directed at people who by default believe nothing like that will happen, of course they said totally worth it. If this poll was conducted among people who voted Brexit and lost job because of Brexit, i would guess answers would differ, by a lot
|
On August 04 2017 00:35 Razyda wrote:
Funny discussion over irrelevant poll. It was hypothetical question directed at people who by default believe nothing like that will happen, of course they said totally worth it. If this poll was conducted among people who voted Brexit and lost job because of Brexit, i would guess answers would differ, by a lot
Blaming anyone and everyone for the results of the referendum is a staple of the reactions of remainers in the aftermath of losing a highly consequential vote. The racists, the old people, the stupid and uneducated, they're all intermittently at fault.
|
On August 03 2017 23:03 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2017 21:24 Danglars wrote:On August 02 2017 07:26 LegalLord wrote:
It's of course a loaded question to put the consequences of Brexit in terms of personal effect on the family. Thinking about "the economy" in the abstract is, for the common man, different than thinking about self and family. But frankly it's the same reality - and some people are willing to acknowledge that.
There are things that matter more than economics and especially short term economics. It's not reasonable to just assume the worst about people because an economic hit is acceptable for the purposes of a desired result. A little more charity on the motivations of the 65+ demographic would go a long way. The irony of the retired telling those still working who voted against leaving that Brexit is worth their jobs is palpable.
If only there was a mechanism wherein the young still working converted into people 65+, then we'd have a great time seeing both sides.
|
On August 04 2017 11:20 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2017 23:03 kollin wrote:On August 03 2017 21:24 Danglars wrote:On August 02 2017 07:26 LegalLord wrote:
It's of course a loaded question to put the consequences of Brexit in terms of personal effect on the family. Thinking about "the economy" in the abstract is, for the common man, different than thinking about self and family. But frankly it's the same reality - and some people are willing to acknowledge that.
There are things that matter more than economics and especially short term economics. It's not reasonable to just assume the worst about people because an economic hit is acceptable for the purposes of a desired result. A little more charity on the motivations of the 65+ demographic would go a long way. The irony of the retired telling those still working who voted against leaving that Brexit is worth their jobs is palpable. If only there was a mechanism wherein the young still working converted into people 65+, then we'd have a great time seeing both sides.
The age of retirement in Britain has already increased as a result of the economic damage caused by Brexit.
|
On August 04 2017 19:29 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 04 2017 11:20 Danglars wrote:On August 03 2017 23:03 kollin wrote:On August 03 2017 21:24 Danglars wrote:On August 02 2017 07:26 LegalLord wrote:
It's of course a loaded question to put the consequences of Brexit in terms of personal effect on the family. Thinking about "the economy" in the abstract is, for the common man, different than thinking about self and family. But frankly it's the same reality - and some people are willing to acknowledge that.
There are things that matter more than economics and especially short term economics. It's not reasonable to just assume the worst about people because an economic hit is acceptable for the purposes of a desired result. A little more charity on the motivations of the 65+ demographic would go a long way. The irony of the retired telling those still working who voted against leaving that Brexit is worth their jobs is palpable. If only there was a mechanism wherein the young still working converted into people 65+, then we'd have a great time seeing both sides. The age of retirement in Britain has already increased as a result of the economic damage caused by Brexit.
That's hilarious. You will attribute absolutely anything negative to Brexit. The age of retirement was going up regardless.
We've had a lot of good weather this summer caused by Brexit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
