Brexit - Leave or Remain poll

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

My word you are deluded. For all the money thrown at the 2015 election.

How much Huge?

Come on, tell the people exactly how much the Kip spent then compare it to what all the other parties spent?

Patience guys, Huge Tw@ doesn't have a fooking clue what the answers are and once he has looked it up he will not want to post the answers because it will make him look the clueless tw@ he actually is.

ps. I don't support UKIP, I have never voted UKIP, I stood for them in a local election just to see what that was all about, it was a nightmare. They only thing they have right is that Brexit would be the right thing for the UK. oh, and I love Nigey who has, despite what Huge the Tw@ posts, has never been a stock broker.

Who said anything about comparison? They staked everything on the election and failed, thats the point. Now they're skint. As for not being a Kipper, pull the other one you mug.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Says a lot about the muff, they can't wait to get back to Romania.

Rumour has it they were also forced into a trial for a local 4th division football club....

....but their wage demands were out of the reach of the owner.

Rickler wrote:

Lord Biro wrote:

By the way, countries like Norway who are outside the EU but who have negotiated trade deals with the EU have had to agree to the free movement of people, employment regulations etc, like all other members. That's how it is.

Really?

Doesn't western Europe get half its gas from Russia.  Are Russians allowed free movement and permission to work etc?

Ricks, you miss the point of the rules and what the idea is. But I guess you are a long way away.

It's the exporting country itself wanting tariff free trade(Russia in your example ) that has to allow free movement of peoples into it's own economy. And Russia do. Of course, there's no great rush of Europeans heading for work in Russia. I give the reality of the situation to explain that if England wanted to export into the EU as a non member after Brexit, they would still have to allow EU migrant workers into England if they so wanted to work here. So, there would be no change whatsoever. The Brexiteers are not giving enough credence to the leverage of just about the most powerful single market on the planet.
The EU is a common market amongst other things. It has always been there for the benefit of it's members. It's not there for the benefit of non members. That's why many African countries complain bitterly about the tariffs and regulations they face, that they see as unfair. From the outside, the EU is often seen as protectionist.

Amsterdamage wrote:

Lord Biro wrote:

I still haven't heard one coherent answer from the exiteers to the current migrant crisis. Not one.
Come on Exiteers, what's your great answer, your great policy that is going to solve the spreading crisis. Keep yer head, build a wall, and hope it all blows over ? How is that going to work in the real world ?
Genuinely interested. I haven't heard an answer anywhere yet.
The exiteers go on and on about the fear campaign of Cameron/the capitalist bank of england etc, but surely their tales of doom regarding the migrant hordes sinking these islands is no more than the same sort of fear campaign.
I saw Boris was caught with his hypocritical trousers down today. Naughty Boris. Naughty everyone.

By the way, countries like Norway who are outside the EU but who have negotiated trade deals with the EU have had to agree to the free movement of people, employment regulations etc, like all other members. That's how it is.

And what's your solution to the migration problem then Biro? Let them all come? Feckin la la land. Houses, hospitals, schools are all over run.
Anyway for the last time migration isn't the be all and end all of Europe for me, never has been. Get out of Europe the migration problem will still be there it's not going away but I'm sure as a start you and Franny could house at least a family each? You could get them working on your allotment in return for a roof over their heads and the benefit of your wisdom.

I have no intention whatsoever of housing strangers where I live. None whatsoever. Where did you get that idea ? However, I did help out striking miners in the 1980s with free relief South West holidays for them and their families.
I don't have an answer to the migration thing that seems to upset so many people. That's why I'm asking the Brexiteers just how their preferred leaving option is going to stop the migration they detest so much. Up until now I personally have had no problem whatsoever with immigration if other Europeans want to come here to work and live. I like cross fertilisation of cultures, beats the fan fest thing.
War refugees and the present crisis, and it is a crisis, are quite a different matter. Wars escalate, as we have seen with Iraq, Afganistan, Libya, Syria etc and mass movements of people are dangerous for everyone. So, something has to be done about that. Merkel's statements were bonkers, and I fail to see the logic. But then, I'm not totally genned up on the undercurrents of that part of Europe down through to Turkey, although I have worked and lived in Romania.
So, I ask again. How is leaving the EU going to stop the current migration levels ? What steps will the Brexiteers take to stop the 2 to 300K net migration a year ? Work migration has always been a case of labour matching up with capital to produce wealth. How do they intend to stop that relationship ? Should UK capital be invested in  the poorer parts of Europe to give employment ?

Lord Tisdale wrote:

The deal involves us taking one Syrian for every miscellaneous Rag we send bag, hello, Merky, EU law doesn't allow us to send illegal migrants anywhere, once they are in they are in for good

Haven't the UK opted out of the "one for one" bit?

Also, aren't migrants/immigrants rights etc part of international law?

Hugh Watt wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

My word you are deluded. For all the money thrown at the 2015 election.

How much Huge?

Come on, tell the people exactly how much the Kip spent then compare it to what all the other parties spent?

Patience guys, Huge Tw@ doesn't have a fooking clue what the answers are and once he has looked it up he will not want to post the answers because it will make him look the clueless tw@ he actually is.

ps. I don't support UKIP, I have never voted UKIP, I stood for them in a local election just to see what that was all about, it was a nightmare. They only thing they have right is that Brexit would be the right thing for the UK. oh, and I love Nigey who has, despite what Huge the Tw@ posts, has never been a stock broker.

Who said anything about comparison? They staked everything on the election and failed, thats the point. Now they're skint. As for not being a Kipper, pull the other one you mug.

So you don't think posting the figures would support your ridiculous statements then? Sensible move.

In the year prior to the election UKIP spent £2.5 million, Labour spent over £30 million to get just over twice as many votes, the LimpDims spent three times as much to get 1.5 million less votes.

UKIP did not throw money at it, they were very conservative in their spending and will have no trouble putting together bigger warchests for the 2019 Euros and the 2020 General, assuming the EUSSR funded Remainers cheat us out of our Independence Day.

You know fook all Huge.

Lord Biro wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Lord Biro wrote:

By the way, countries like Norway who are outside the EU but who have negotiated trade deals with the EU have had to agree to the free movement of people, employment regulations etc, like all other members. That's how it is.

Really?

Doesn't western Europe get half its gas from Russia.  Are Russians allowed free movement and permission to work etc?

Ricks, you miss the point of the rules and what the idea is. But I guess you are a long way away.

It's the exporting country itself wanting tariff free trade(Russia in your example ) that has to allow free movement of peoples into it's own economy. And Russia do. Of course, there's no great rush of Europeans heading for work in Russia. I give the reality of the situation to explain that if England wanted to export into the EU as a non member after Brexit, they would still have to allow EU migrant workers into England if they so wanted to work here. So, there would be no change whatsoever. The Brexiteers are not giving enough credence to the leverage of just about the most powerful single market on the planet.
The EU is a common market amongst other things. It has always been there for the benefit of it's members. It's not there for the benefit of non members. That's why many African countries complain bitterly about the tariffs and regulations they face, that they see as unfair. From the outside, the EU is often seen as protectionist.

Whoah Biccy, your bullsh1t grows day on day.

Russia does not have a freedom of movement deal with the EU, the UK would not have to offer it either, the EU27 need the UK market, they sell us £80 billion more goods than we sell them, do you really not get that?

One country sucks the FOM crap, Norway, Switzerland has by law to comply with their own referendum. Norway has to comply because they have a massive balance of trade surplus with the EU and their entire economy depends on it, they are in exactly the opposite position to us.

The EU and particularly the eurozone economies are shot away, the ECB has started up a massive QE regime today to try and drag them out of recession before they become deflationary, it will not work unless they address the structural problems, something the EU never ever does, while Greece is imploding under the weight of the migrant invasion the EU will be working on the latest consumer legislation.

Moist_Von_Lipwig wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

The deal involves us taking one Syrian for every miscellaneous Rag we send bag, hello, Merky, EU law doesn't allow us to send illegal migrants anywhere, once they are in they are in for good

Haven't the UK opted out of the "one for one" bit?

Also, aren't migrants/immigrants rights etc part of international law?

The UK has no obligation to get involved in the EU illegal, economic migrant, quota system at all, the problem comes when these illegal, economic migrants get EU passports, at that point they can sachet over here with their extended family and get claiming benefits.

Edited to keep your muppet moderators happy.

Can people stick to the arguments please and not generalise with abusive terms.

Thanks.

If you don't like the Muppet show......................

Tis has been banned for 24 hours for continued use of inappropriate language and mod abuse.

He has been warned enough times and if he is as smart as he thinks he is he should know where the line is. We are pretty thick skinned on this site but enough is enough.

The mods are just doing their job and we don't expect to be abused when we take action. You are free to disagree with our decisions but we have been elected to moderate.  This is a Argyle message board with moderators. No one is forcing you to post here.

The guy has always been a racist and homophobe, delicately trying to push boundaries on public forums as far as he can.
It's people like him that give the Brexit campaign, and UKIP, a bad name. We all know there are many nasty racists out there, they haven't gone away just because the EDL/BNP/britain first etc etc were told to change their tactics, to get off the streets and infiltrate the UKIP bandwagon. No one openly admits to it, but they're out there campaigning just like Tisdale, spreading their background poison, continually trying to normalise their racist language and objectives.

Unfortunately for Tis his somewhat crude usage of racial terminology provides the professionally offended with a much appreciated stick with which to beat him. To call him a racist is unfair without knowing the bloke imo. Equally unfair is the homophobe jibe, I can't recall anything to justify such an accusation.

Lord Biro wrote:

The guy has always been a racist and homophobe, delicately trying to push boundaries on public forums as far as he can.
It's people like him that give the Brexit campaign, and UKIP, a bad name. We all know there are many nasty racists out there, they haven't gone away just because the EDL/BNP/britain first etc etc were told to change their tactics, to get off the streets and infiltrate the UKIP bandwagon. No one openly admits to it, but they're out there campaigning just like Tisdale, spreading their background poison, continually trying to normalise their racist language and objectives.

Bingo. Couldn't agree more.

Let's face it anybody with 100s of posts on a messageboard for team he doesn't support has to be a bit fecked up, don't they?

it would be nice if the media just reported actual facts for and against the EU referendum instead of focusing on scaremongering tactics

There are no actual facts, just people guessing, or in some cases expressing considered opinions on the future, whether in or out.

One fact for sure......we wouldn't be giving the EU millions of £'s a day to just be a member.

That's not a fact.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

My word you are deluded. For all the money thrown at the 2015 election.

How much Huge?

Come on, tell the people exactly how much the Kip spent then compare it to what all the other parties spent?

Patience guys, Huge Tw@ doesn't have a fooking clue what the answers are and once he has looked it up he will not want to post the answers because it will make him look the clueless tw@ he actually is.

ps. I don't support UKIP, I have never voted UKIP, I stood for them in a local election just to see what that was all about, it was a nightmare. They only thing they have right is that Brexit would be the right thing for the UK. oh, and I love Nigey who has, despite what Huge the Tw@ posts, has never been a stock broker.

Who said anything about comparison? They staked everything on the election and failed, thats the point. Now they're skint. As for not being a Kipper, pull the other one you mug.

So you don't think posting the figures would support your ridiculous statements then? Sensible move.

In the year prior to the election UKIP spent £2.5 million, Labour spent over £30 million to get just over twice as many votes, the LimpDims spent three times as much to get 1.5 million less votes.

UKIP did not throw money at it, they were very conservative in their spending and will have no trouble putting together bigger warchests for the 2019 Euros and the 2020 General, assuming the EUSSR funded Remainers cheat us out of our Independence Day.

You know fook all Huge.

So what then are UKIP doing now? Are they as a party campaigning on Brexit? Why did they get utterly trounced in the Oldham by-election? For someone that doesn't support the UKIPs you don't have get hot under the collar when some attacks them. Mind you no one knows what you are actually for, we know what you are against; Argyle, Europe and multi-culturalism. You are currently claiming to have 'grown out' of City,  until I suspect our inevitable defeat at your shit ground when the red and jesters hat will come out again for sure.

Once again because you seem to have some difficulty in understanding how FPTP works. Labour got 232 times the number of MP's and the Liberals got 8 times the number of MP's than the UKIPs got. 4 million votes means FA when it only gets you 1 seat.

Talking of ridiculous statements, I'd like to see your proof that the Remain campaign is EU funded??

Tis doesn't have the right of reply until 6pm tonight when he is reactivated.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Tis doesn't have the right of reply until 6pm tonight when he is reactivated.

Why bother re-activating him, Hairy J got removed for less IMHO.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Tis doesn't have the right of reply until 6pm tonight when he is reactivated.

Why bother re-activating him, Hairy J got removed for less IMHO.

We have a warnings/banning process that we have to follow. We did follow it with Hairy though I understand why he feels aggrieved by it.

Tis will have to toe the line when he comes back or he can go elsewhere. I think we have all had enough of him pushing his luck.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Tis doesn't have the right of reply until 6pm tonight when he is reactivated.

Why bother re-activating him, Hairy J got removed for less IMHO.

It would be convenient if we could all choose someone we constantly disagreed with/disliked to be permanently banned

There would be nobody left!

Be careful what you wish for Les.