** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
roubaixtuesday
Posts: 1958
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby roubaixtuesday » 19 Jul 2019, 6:49pm

windmiller wrote:Oh so the polls have decided that many of us have changed our minds. Those accurate mind reading polls that have been so great at predicticting future events so far have just got to be right :lol:


As pointed out previously, polls predicted exactly the outcome of the Brexit, despite mythology to the opposite.

Do try to get your facts straight.

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 8866
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby 661-Pete » 19 Jul 2019, 6:53pm

The error in the predictions of opinion polls, as compared with the actual result in June 2016, wasn't as great as all that. It may have been bigger than the sampling error in some cases, but not by many sigmas.

It may be that the actual number of mind-changers - from Leave to Remain - is not as great as some polls predict. But I still maintain that there are a significant number.

And don't forget that the pollsters in USA correctly forecast that Clinton would get the larger number of votes. They didn't correctly account for gerrymandering of course...
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 1958
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby roubaixtuesday » 19 Jul 2019, 7:02pm

661-Pete wrote:The error in the predictions of opinion polls, as compared with the actual result in June 2016, wasn't as great as all that. It may have been bigger than the sampling error in some cases, but not by many sigmas.

It may be that the actual number of mind-changers - from Leave to Remain - is not as great as some polls predict. But I still maintain that there are a significant number.

And don't forget that the pollsters in USA correctly forecast that Clinton would get the larger number of votes. They didn't correctly account for gerrymandering of course...


Actually it was entirely accurate, spot on within error margins.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-eu-r ... m-36271589

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 8866
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby 661-Pete » 19 Jul 2019, 7:44pm

roubaixtuesday wrote:Actually it was entirely accurate, spot on within error margins.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politi ... m-36271589
Thanks for the update - albeit not all the polls confirm your statement.

Perhaps we were in denial in the days up to 23 June - me amongst them :( - simply refusing to believe those polls that predicted Leave, whilst hanging on doggedly to the ones that still predicted Remain. It often happens - a psychological thing I suppose.

Which also means that persistent Leavers are still refusing to believe the polls showing a pronounced swing towards Remain.

Of course they (WM, andrec &co on this forum) will in turn accuse us of quite the opposite. No-win situation (*sigh*).
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 2742
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby PDQ Mobile » 19 Jul 2019, 9:42pm

661-Pete wrote:
roubaixtuesday wrote:Actually it was entirely accurate, spot on within error margins.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politi ... m-36271589
Thanks for the update - albeit not all the polls confirm your statement.

Perhaps we were in denial in the days up to 23 June - me amongst them :( - simply refusing to believe those polls that predicted Leave, whilst hanging on doggedly to the ones that still predicted Remain. It often happens - a psychological thing I suppose.

Which also means that persistent Leavers are still refusing to believe the polls showing a pronounced swing towards Remain.

Of course they (WM, andrec &co on this forum) will in turn accuse us of quite the opposite. No-win situation (*sigh*).

Maybe we should have another referendum ( with all the downside) and find out?
Settle it for the next decade or two.
Or perhaps a General Election?

Ask those wilful people!

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 2742
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby PDQ Mobile » 19 Jul 2019, 11:41pm

Vorpal wrote:I've outlined my views on the (potential) positives in previous posts

Please forgive late reply.
And thank you for your response.

I take your point about agriculture and possible benefits with regard to leaving the EU.
There were in the seventies and eighties policies which were entirely driven by the pursuit of ever cheaper food and the maximizing of production.
These were of course negotiated policies with our own UK Govt. around the table. It was however macro planning and sometimes it went over the top.
The last twenty or so years have seen much improvement, particularly perhaps in marginal land areas (that is where I know a little about things).

Certainly the environmentalists have got to have a bigger say than formerly and a bigger slice of funding.

Compromise is often difficult to strike in agriculture.
There are so many factors interacting. And some of those factors are poorly understood, even by experts.
Well meaning environmental projects have sometimes been a waste of money.
------------
Certainly the dependence upon subsidy is almost total on many farms now.
The numbers of people employed on the land continues to decrease. Machines become ever bigger and small difficult fields on steeper poorer soils run to disuse and bracken and scrub infestation.
Plant trees on such land?
It is a solution for sure, but overlooks the diversity found in hay and grazing fields.
But on marginal land returns are small and the inevitable consequence would be more expensive food. ( Brynpoeth overlooks this in his growing oats on marginal land appeals!)


My impression is, that very often in the past, the EU has been more sympathetic to innovation and "green" thinking than has Westminster or Cardiff.

Certainly there have been abuses of EU funding but the policing of that use of EU money lay for the most part with the Authorities here at home.
The culpability there is actually a UK one.

So while I could see that opportunities might present themselves in a UK agricultural sector outside of the EU, I am very sceptical that that would actually come to pass. Who would drive such a change of policy that would IMV inevitably lead to higher food prices?

Take for example Rees Mogg. He is a big landowner and doubtless receives considerable EU subsidy.
One of his big bugbears is the "3 crop rule" an EU rotation requirement which aims to preserve soil quality rather than maximize production (as I understand it).
I imagine his view of a UK agri sector would not be your own?
And nor mine.

There is a good deal of sound agricultural practice right across Europe. (Not everywhere it is true, Spain's off season intensive veg production notable perhaps; us Northerners want our cheap winter salad!)

The fine climate and soils of Europe are are veritable treasure trove for it's inhabitants.
It is my firmly held belief that we benefit as EU members, not just from that treasure trove, but the knowledge that lies behind farming it too.
-------
(Many of your ideas about hedgerows, diversity and fruit growing, I am not only supportive of, but actually practice in a smallish (and unprofitable!) way.)

Regarding fisheries.
I am old enough to remember pre EU fishing in the UK.
Depletion of species seemed to be far more frequent than now.
The Herring was historically almost fished to extinction solely by UK fishermen.
So I think (as a layman)overall the EU has had a beneficial effect there too.

andrec
Posts: 110
Joined: 1 Jul 2019, 12:35pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby andrec » 20 Jul 2019, 8:21am

661-Pete wrote:
roubaixtuesday wrote:Actually it was entirely accurate, spot on within error margins.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politi ... m-36271589
Thanks for the update - albeit not all the polls confirm your statement.

Perhaps we were in denial in the days up to 23 June - me amongst them :( - simply refusing to believe those polls that predicted Leave, whilst hanging on doggedly to the ones that still predicted Remain. It often happens - a psychological thing I suppose.

Which also means that persistent Leavers are still refusing to believe the polls showing a pronounced swing towards Remain.

Of course they (WM, andrec &co on this forum) will in turn accuse us of quite the opposite. No-win situation (*sigh*).


I won't accuse you of anything.I don't refuse to believe any opinion polls. I'm simply not interested in them, just as the Remainer establishment were uninterested in many opinion polls showing support for leaving the EU during the 80s, 90s and 00s. They had the upper hand, liked the status quo and could afford to ignore them. Leavers are in that happy position now thanks to the tireless work of Mr Farage in forcing a people's vote onto a very reluctant Mr Cameron. Persistent Remainers never wanted that people's vote and disregarded opinion polls. Now they've become ardent advocates of heeding the views of the people. They fool nobody by their sudden, cynical desire for the masses to have their say.

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 8866
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby 661-Pete » 20 Jul 2019, 8:40am

They fool nobody by their sudden, cynical desire for the masses to have their say.
It isn't cynical, and it isn't hypocritical. We still think of all referendums as a Bad Thing, a warped manifestation of 'democracy' which often delivers a rogue result which is plainly damaging.

I concede that this is not always the case, such as with the recent referendum to legalise abortion in Ireland. But this last could also have been achieved by Parliamentary legislation, without the distraction of a referendum.

But in this exceptional case of Brexit, another referendum is quite simply the only way out of the mess. We don't like it but we still have to call for it. No-one would willingly ask for their leg to be amputated, but if a malignant tumour were discovered on their leg, they might well agree to an amputation as, hopefully, the only way to stop the cancer spreading.

And we are well aware that the second referendum may not go the way we wish. But it's our only hope - short of civil war. Some of the pro-Brex**iteers have already shown they can be violent and abusive on the streets. Revoking Art50 without a 'referendum' would only provoke them further.

Don't the Brex**iteers see it? Bleat "democracy" all you like, yell "fake news" or "project fear" all you like, everyone can see it's going to be an unholy mess...
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).

kwackers
Posts: 13299
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby kwackers » 20 Jul 2019, 9:41am

One of the things I think worth considering about referendums is the idea that "the people" know what's best for them.
It's a contentious issue I admit but anyone that studies human psychology for the shortest time soon realises it's simply not true due to the myriad of forms of cognitive bias we all employ.

Imagine a referendum on cycling.
You don't have to look too hard to find the die hard's screaming their sound bites about the ills of cycling. Arguing against them is usually pointless because they deliberately hook into peoples lazy thinking.
Cyclists kill people, they ride too fast, they get in the way, they cause accidents and congestion.
The arguments against these sound bites are long and complex and folk simply can't be bothered and probably don't understand or have the desire to even try.
Paint "Cyclists cost us 500 million a year, lets spend it on the NHS instead" on the side of a bus and the cause is probably lost.

There are no shortage of experts out there who are willing to explain the benefits both of cycling and of a transport policy that supports cycling but phrase the question correctly, let the sound bites roll and a referendum on whether cycling should be allowed on busy city streets would imo be a foregone conclusion.

This to my mind is why we have experts and governments who actually listen to them. That's one reason why I vote for folk. Not to kow tow to popularism but to make decisions, even decisions I don't like for the greater good and that hopefully have a sound basis in evidence rather than the reactionary nonsense we seem to currently get.

Whatever you're thoughts on the EU we were badly let down by our government. Populism has always been a problem with our two party system, my hope is the whole sorry mess will result in a better system where individuals feel they have a say.
I'm not putting money on it though.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 9309
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby Cunobelin » 20 Jul 2019, 9:49am

kwackers wrote:One of the things I think worth considering about referendums is the idea that "the people" know what's best for them.
It's a contentious issue I admit but anyone that studies human psychology for the shortest time soon realises it's simply not true due to the myriad of forms of cognitive bias we all employ.

Imagine a referendum on cycling.
You don't have to look too hard to find the die hard's screaming their sound bites about the ills of cycling. Arguing against them is usually pointless because they deliberately hook into peoples lazy thinking.
Cyclists kill people, they ride too fast, they get in the way, they cause accidents and congestion.
The arguments against these sound bites are long and complex and folk simply can't be bothered and probably don't understand or have the desire to even try.
Paint "Cyclists cost us 500 million a year, lets spend it on the NHS instead" on the side of a bus and the cause is probably lost.

There are no shortage of experts out there who are willing to explain the benefits both of cycling and of a transport policy that supports cycling but phrase the question correctly, let the sound bites roll and a referendum on whether cycling should be allowed on busy city streets would imo be a foregone conclusion.

This to my mind is why we have experts and governments who actually listen to them. That's one reason why I vote for folk. Not to kow tow to popularism but to make decisions, even decisions I don't like for the greater good and that hopefully have a sound basis in evidence rather than the reactionary nonsense we seem to currently get.

Whatever you're thoughts on the EU we were badly let down by our government. Populism has always been a problem with our two party system, my hope is the whole sorry mess will result in a better system where individuals feel they have a say.
I'm not putting money on it though.



My emphasis

You forget the simple fact that the vocal minority don't need experts - they "know" better than any expert

kwackers
Posts: 13299
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby kwackers » 20 Jul 2019, 9:53am

Cunobelin wrote:My emphasis

You forget the simple fact that the vocal minority don't need experts - they "know" better than any expert

Which was really the whole point of my TLDR post. :wink:

User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 8866
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby 661-Pete » 20 Jul 2019, 10:10am

"Cyclists kill people, they ride too fast, they get in the way, they cause accidents and congestion."
You forgot to add "Cycling is dangerous - set out on a journey by bike and it's odds-on you'll finish it in a wooden box...."

I've no doubt there are plenty out there who believe in such arrant nonsense.

Of course cycling is dangerous - let's not forget that. To some degree. Just as making a cup of tea and toast is dangerous - to some degree. In fact, being alive is dangerous. Every lifespan in history has, or will, inevitably end in death. Do we not want to live, in consequence?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).

HobbesOnTour
Posts: 358
Joined: 20 Feb 2017, 5:12pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby HobbesOnTour » 20 Jul 2019, 10:15am

661-Pete wrote:
I concede that this is not always the case, such as with the recent referendum to legalise abortion in Ireland. But this last could also have been achieved by Parliamentary legislation, without the distraction of a referendum.


I think you may be mistaken here, Pete.
The recent abortion referendum in Ireland was not to legalise abortion, it was, in fact, to remove a paragraph in the constitution (ironically inserted by referendum in the early 80's, in part inspired by a fear of European interference in Irish laws) that guaranteed protection to the "life of the unborn".

By removing that paragraph, abortion, by default was no longer illegal. Proposed legislation covering the practicalities (such as time limits, fatal foetal abnormalities etc.) was published before the referendum so that people could clearly see the impact of their vote. That parallel is certainly relevant in the Brexit debate - people knew exactly what they were voting for.

It did raise the issue (not discussed much) for those that wanted to see the removal of the protection for the unborn but who thought the proposed legislation was too relaxed. (In this case, those people can now campaign for legislative changes).

Due to the wording of the new amendment, any changes to abortion legislation can now be done by Parliamentary legislation.

This referendum was one of many suggested after a consultation process - https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/

This meant that issues were highlighted long before any referendum was announced and healthy debate occurred in the time between announcement and voting.

windmiller
Posts: 369
Joined: 9 Feb 2009, 5:10pm

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby windmiller » 20 Jul 2019, 11:22am

kwackers wrote:One of the things I think worth considering about referendums is the idea that "the people" know what's best for them.
It's a contentious issue I admit but anyone that studies human psychology for the shortest time soon realises it's simply not true due to the myriad of forms of cognitive bias we all employ.

Imagine a referendum on cycling.
You don't have to look too hard to find the die hard's screaming their sound bites about the ills of cycling. Arguing against them is usually pointless because they deliberately hook into peoples lazy thinking.
Cyclists kill people, they ride too fast, they get in the way, they cause accidents and congestion.
The arguments against these sound bites are long and complex and folk simply can't be bothered and probably don't understand or have the desire to even try.
Paint "Cyclists cost us 500 million a year, lets spend it on the NHS instead" on the side of a bus and the cause is probably lost.

There are no shortage of experts out there who are willing to explain the benefits both of cycling and of a transport policy that supports cycling but phrase the question correctly, let the sound bites roll and a referendum on whether cycling should be allowed on busy city streets would imo be a foregone conclusion.

This to my mind is why we have experts and governments who actually listen to them. That's one reason why I vote for folk. Not to kow tow to popularism but to make decisions, even decisions I don't like for the greater good and that hopefully have a sound basis in evidence rather than the reactionary nonsense we seem to currently get.

Whatever you're thoughts on the EU we were badly let down by our government. Populism has always been a problem with our two party system, my hope is the whole sorry mess will result in a better system where individuals feel they have a say.
I'm not putting money on it though.


You contradict yourself so many times here mostly with open ended hand wringing.
What you really mean is that " the people don't know what's best for them at all"

Oldjohnw
Posts: 1490
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: ** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Postby Oldjohnw » 20 Jul 2019, 12:58pm

I fear that we are getting back into more heat than light territory. Understandable, however. There, i've just put another bit of coal on.
John

Cycling and recycling