So why do you think you know better than for example the architect of the Euro (otmar issing) , the nobel laureate economist Stiglitz, and most of the economists who predicted 2008 (unlike the IMF, the ECB, and all the silly remain economist pressure groups that produce relentless remainer hype) When they all say the euro will collapse. History says the euro will collapse.
er....becasue we are not, and never have been, part of the Euro?
....it's all downhill from here.
there is no discussion. You were plain wrong.You see I am happy to have a discussion on it.
But won't accept it. You never do.
....it's all downhill from here.
I support banning clubs from Cumbria from racing outside Cumbria. So does my wife. We're both members of the FRA. I also support the raising of all clubs from the Peak District to membership of over 5000, with permanent gazebos.Borrel ( the chief diplomat of EU ) called for raising the size to over 50000 with permanent military structures. Van der Leyen supports it all the way.
....it's all downhill from here.
unsupported opinnionGovernment bombarding us with remain messages throughtout national media was way in excess of coverage it was possible for leave to buy. In addition to the official channels, and the lack of leave proponents on such as QT was an outrage by the BBC
....it's all downhill from here.
But that doesn't change the fact that the Remain campaign spent more than the Leave one.Originally Posted by Dave_Mole
£19.3 million against £13.3 million according to the Electoral Commission
https://www.electoralcommission.org....-eu-referendum
And Oracle is right to say that Leave were disadvantaged because the Remain campaign had the weight of the establishment on their side - the Government machinery, all three main political parties and the civil service. And boy did they use it.
The Government spent £9.3 million to print a propaganda leaflet sent to all households in favour of remaining, money that was denied the other side. So added to the official campaigns the money spent by Remain was more than twice that of Leave.
Then they used the Treasury to produce bogus forecasts predicting that the UK would lose 500,000 to 800,000 jobs in the two years following a vote to leave (not actually leaving). How did that work out? You go on about the red bus Dave Mole but at least that was based on fact i.e. it was the gross contribution. Not something you could say about the Treasury's ridiculous scaremongering.
And they even used a US president to state that the UK would be at the back of the queue in any trade negotiations. The reality is that we will be right at the front.
Well clearly not that easy. I think you need to try harder.
Evidence?. Bercow should not allow an amendment that changes the substance and intent of a government motion an amendment should only amend. He abuses standing orders every day.
....it's all downhill from here.
seems to me they were quite unpopular.the Remain campaign spent more than the Leave one.
£19.3 million against £13.3 million according to the Electoral Commission
If you want to get into conspiracy theories about Brexit, what about Russia? Or aliens?
....it's all downhill from here.
I'm just posting this so that you can have a nice little cry
https://assets.publishing.service.go...for-the-uk.pdf
and the BBC's biased response to it:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politi...endum-35990076
....it's all downhill from here.
presently decliningThe one assumption I did make (budget contribution) was on the basis of a provable trend, although presently flat.
....it's all downhill from here.
because they get the impression that, if no one points out the obvious lies they can get away with it. And then pass them off as "fact".No idea why you even bother
....it's all downhill from here.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote