EU referendum, brexit and the aftermath

Is it true? You tell us, you raised the point in the first place. Obviously the Morgan Stanley's and the Goldman's only care about making money, but the economy doing well also improves the standard of living for majority of people in the UK.

I agree that there is a big problem with relative inequality but you think Brexit is going to fix that? How exactly? The relative inequality in Britain is a result of our own policies not EU ones - EU money actually goes to the areas that are less prosperous.

What stance are you taking exactly? I'm confused.

I'm sure we all benefited from the 2008 crisis, which was essentially induced by MS/GS in america

brexit in itself won't fix inequality, but brexit in itself is one step closer to a more direct form of democracy, the decentralisation of power

By the way, if you're worried about Article 50 not being invoked I'd worry more about May than Goldman or Morgan Stanley. She's told Merkel today that talks won't begin this year, so that's 2017 already. I expect further kicking into the long grass to come too.

So if you think the 2008 crisis was bad for normal people, why do you think doing something else that looks highly likely to plunge us into recession would be a good thing now?

@mouldy-wart - sounds like you consider yourself an anarchist then?

Interesting! So Brexit is going to change how our democracy works in the UK? How? What is this more direct form of democracy of which you speak? Are you talking about voting from home on government provided iPads? Please go on.

You know we already have a fully democratic government here right? Which is widely respected around the world because we invented it?

My understanding of the case is that its not about stopping article 50 being invoked, more about ensuring that its invoked correctly, and in line with our constitutional arrangements, which in this case are not straightforward.

Once we know how article 50 can be triggered, we can pull that trigger.

One of the big arguments for leave was re parliamentary sovereignty. Denying that to Parliament on something like article 50 (if that's where it should sit) seems a bad idea.

Clearing up if it is Parliament's decision before we are too late to fix things seems a good idea too.

What's the issue?

brexit in itself won't fix inequality, but brexit in itself is one step closer to a more direct form of democracy, the decentralisation of power

And you're objecting to an attempt to ensure that the power to invoke Article 50 is placed in the hands of the House of Commons, a democratically-elected representative body, rather than the PM, who was elected as one of two candidates only by Conservative MPs, and who got the job by default when the other contender withdrew?

It's like raaaiiiiiiiiiin...

You know we already have a fully democratic government here right? Which is widely respected around the world because we invented it?

Christ, thought it would be difficult for anyone to out-stupid mouldy wart, but you aced it.

This democracy lark is all Greek to me.

I think we'll leave and keep unlimited movement of people, which would be the most ironic ending and therefore winning my "most likely" vote.

And a massive recession that puts the final nail into the NHS and ensures that the wealth transfer from the poorest to the richest speeds up hugely.

Not a recession will finish the NHS but the will from the people running the private to have your house instead of you bequesting it to your children.

I could swear there's some meaning in there somewhere.

I'm not getting it either, but if the idea is all inheritance goes to the state I could get behind that.

Actually I think he's saying that when you get old you will have to sell your house to pay for your private medical bills rather than leave it to your children.

Because due to Brexit you can no longer go to Spain and put all the costs of your demise onto their tax payers?

I don't care who paid for it I have it.

On first reading I thought @Fox was being ironic. Damn

You know we already have a fully democratic government here right? Which is widely respected around the world because we invented it?

powerful stuff.

This decentralised power that you talk of, I'm interested to hear more about this. From what I can tell about brexit, with it's mantra of #takebackcontrol, is that it will take some of the power that is currently held in Brussels and will place it in Westminster. As Westminster already holds all of the other similar power, that rather suggests that it is being centralised. In Westminster.

So I'm quite interested to know that if we're going to have decentralised power, which bits of power currently, or anticipated to be, held by Westminster is going to be moved elsewhere? Where is it going to go? Who is going to hold it? And with more direct democracy, how will we, the voters, be able to have a say in it?

I've asked this of a couple of people who have trumpted about "decentralised power" but nobody seems to know so I think that this is something that would be very useful to share.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-betting-bookmakers-say-its-likely-article-50-might-never-be-triggered-2016-7?r=US&IR=T

Nice false dichotomy... oh, hold on .... poor false dichotomy and very shoddy debate tactics. Suggestive that you've realised that you don't have anything to back up your arguments when challenged about them.

Did you forget to consider that the point about trolling may have been related to your second statement rather than the first or were you stupid enough to think we wouldn't notice.

1/10 probably could do better.

England invented everything, and that's why we don't need the EU

I think you'll find Scotland invented most things.