Don't we all wish we had a decent PM who would simply say "it was wrong; we are scrapping it and returning to normal; all the money due to be chucked down the toilet will instead be used for the NHS, schools and sorting out the broken legal situation"?

I am bewildered by the whole thing. Why does it have to be so quick?

And 36 billion the cost of a divorce. Why? Why? Why? Get out of Brexit; scrap all this shit; get on with what British society really needs.

I bet if they held another referendum tomorrow over whether at 36 billion we should continue with Brexit - YES - or drop it - NO - the country would vote 85% NO - forget stupid Brexit and save the money.

Voting "no" would mean admitting to being wrong.

Brexit voters: Most say economic damage is a price worth paying
"Three out of five people who voted to leave in June 2016 regard "significant damage to the British economy to be a price worth paying" for Brexit, according to a new survey by YouGov."
Majority of older Leave voters say significant economic damage is 'price worth paying', finds YouGov
"71 per cent of over-65s would accept a big economic hit – and half are willing for family members to lose their jobs"

It's not so surprising that Leave voters already in financial difficulty wouldn't care if there was damage to the economy but for anyone sitting pretty with a generous pension or more and still willing to see damage to the economy or even family members lose their jobs is really a bit sick. But perhaps when they answered the poll it was less about accepting economic damage or job losses than interpreting the question as "you were wrong to vote Leave, admit it!" and just digging in their heels. If a second referendum were called they might completely ignore the question and just vote the same way as they did the first time, especially if the right-wing press, Farage, etc. were still banging the drum for Brexit, calling a second referendum an attempt to "overturn democracy", etc.

Jo wrote:
Voting "no" would mean admitting to being wrong.

Brexit voters: Most say economic damage is a price worth paying
"Three out of five people who voted to leave in June 2016 regard "significant damage to the British economy to be a price worth paying" for Brexit, according to a new survey by YouGov."
Majority of older Leave voters say significant economic damage is 'price worth paying', finds YouGov
"71 per cent of over-65s would accept a big economic hit – and half are willing for family members to lose their jobs"

It's not so surprising that Leave voters already in financial difficulty wouldn't care if there was damage to the economy but for anyone sitting pretty with a generous pension or more and still willing to see damage to the economy or even family members lose their jobs is really a bit sick. But perhaps when they answered the poll it was less about accepting economic damage or job losses than interpreting the question as "you were wrong to vote Leave, admit it!" and just digging in their heels. If a second referendum were called they might completely ignore the question and just vote the same way as they did the first time, especially if the right-wing press, Farage, etc. were still banging the drum for Brexit, calling a second referendum an attempt to "overturn democracy", etc.

Accepting short term damage for long term benefit is perfectly reasonable, but I was expecting a staged plan to minimise the damage rather than a sudden blow.
People wanting brexit doesn't mean they want it at whatever cost.

Brexit is a 'catastrophe', says David Davis' former chief of staff

"Brexit is a “catastrophe” and “sensible” MPs should form a new party to reverse it, a former adviser to George Osborne and David Davis has said. ...

Previously, he said Theresa May's inflexibility has "hamstrung" the UK's attempts to get a good Brexit deal.

In a separate attack, the former aide also said Andrea Leadsom was the “dimmest bulb” in Theresa May’s Cabinet. ...



...he suggested some newspaper editors had supported leaving the EU as a way of exacting revenge on David Cameron over the Leveson Inquiry into the press."

and the UK is ignoring the fact it needs THOUSANDS of trained trade negotiators and that trade deals can often take years to complete.

The 6 expert trade negotiators loaned by Australia to assist the British have now been called home as they are experts in Asia and especially China and are urgently needed.

My father had immense dealings with China in banking decades ago. As he was a Chinaophile by the end of his life he was treated as 'family' by top Chinese officials but he often talked of how so many from the West steam in and think they understand the Chinese.

One example he often talked about : the Chinese after a few meetings will tell you that you are "now a trusted and wise friend" and Westerners take this as a compliment and believe it means they are "well in" with the Chinese officials.

What it actually means is "you are now a trusted and wise friend so will NEVER do a thing to harm China and will always..as a "trusted friend" put China's interest first because you are also "wise" and know that is the right thing to do."

As of today : the UK has NO trade negotiators.

hedda wrote:
and the UK is ignoring the fact it needs THOUSANDS of trained trade negotiators and that trade deals can often take years to complete.

The 6 expert trade negotiators loaned by Australia to assist the British have now been called home as they are experts in Asia and especially China and are urgently needed.

My father had immense dealings with China in banking decades ago. As he was a Chinaophile by the end of his life he was treated as 'family' by top Chinese officials but he often talked of how so many from the West steam in and think they understand the Chinese.

One example he often talked about : the Chinese after a few meetings will tell you that you are "now a trusted and wise friend" and Westerners take this as a compliment and believe it means they are "well in" with the Chinese officials.

What it actually means is "you are now a trusted and wise friend so will NEVER do a thing to harm China and will always..as a "trusted friend" put China's interest first because you are also "wise" and know that is the right thing to do."

As of today : the UK has NO trade negotiators.


Which explains why they didnt give us the information before the vote to help people decide.
turns out there WAS no information.