Are you "Infected by a remainer mind virus"?

[Stevek76]

Might it be that some (a reasonable %age) who voted Brexit and now see the disaster it is cannot admit to themselves how they fell "hook line and sinker" for the lies and thus should take some of the blame for the costs and disaster.

Probably, a similar effect is seen in polling with what's termed 'false recall', except with that people decide, subconsciously or consciously that they supported/voted for the other option than they actually did.

This affects both recalled past voting but also events, eg the iraq invasion is a good example with polling at the time being rather different to polling 10 years later asking people what their position was at the time.

[axel_knutt]

"We are losing our advantage. The UK is being torn apart from a banking perspective in a number of different ways. I would say the UK’s chance of regaining what it has lost is virtually zero. The question is how quickly does it lose more.....London [will] become less and less important."

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/guy-ha ... nkly-nuts/

[Psamathe]

..... Easier in ones own mind to "take the view" that it's the implementation that caused the disaster (so they don't feel their vote contributed to the disaster).......

Ian

But it is the implementaion of the hard Brexit and unbelievable ignorance and arrogance of just how unprepared our stupid politicians were for running into Brexit like a bull in a china shop!
We were never going to have the same deal or,as the same stupid politicians claimed,be better off out of the EU.
...

I'm unsure (genuinely unsure not disagreeing).
I think maybe many voting for Brexit wanted to stop Freedom of Movement (more of the "Control of our Borders" and a degree of not wanting "immigrants" but without actually thinking about benefits of immigration and how immigration and Freedom of Movement related to each other in their own terms). Ending Freedom of Movement really forced a pretty hard Brexit as it meant no Single Market membership. I wonder if those blaming the "implementation" just hadn't appreciated the damage ending Freedom of Movement (and thus Single Market membership) would do.

Ian

[reohn2]

..... Easier in ones own mind to "take the view" that it's the implementation that caused the disaster (so they don't feel their vote contributed to the disaster).......

Ian

But it is the implementaion of the hard Brexit and unbelievable ignorance and arrogance of just how unprepared our stupid politicians were for running into Brexit like a bull in a china shop!
We were never going to have the same deal or,as the same stupid politicians claimed,be better off out of the EU.
...

I'm unsure (genuinely unsure not disagreeing).
I think maybe many voting for Brexit wanted to stop Freedom of Movement (more of the "Control of our Borders" and a degree of not wanting "immigrants" but without actually thinking about benefits of immigration and how immigration and Freedom of Movement related to each other in their own terms). Ending Freedom of Movement really forced a pretty hard Brexit as it meant no Single Market membership. I wonder if those blaming the "implementation" just hadn't appreciated the damage ending Freedom of Movement (and thus Single Market membership) would do.

Ian

Well the proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say,immigration hasn't reduced as Brexit voters wanted,in fact it's increased despite an end to freedom of movement as a result now crops aren't picked and farmers have since planted only the crops they can pick and as a result have been forced to import more food.

Did someone say "you couldn't make it up" they did and we're suffering as a result.

And before anyone claims immigrant labour were not being paid fairly(not your claims),they should ask themselves why that was?

EDITED for clarity and spelling

[Jdsk]

PS: Increasing rumours about a new battery plant in Somerset with connections to Jaguar Land Rover.

Somerset was probably the location for the next Tesla factory before they chose not to build it in the UK.

And it's worth reviewing what happened to Britishvolt.

Today's rumours include £500M of subsidy:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... lant-in-uk

Of course production in the UK would directly affect the tariffs related to the rules of origin in the TCA. But it won't reduce the pressure to shift the dates of increment because they're due before there'll be significant production from this factory. if it's built.

BBC News summarising the rumours:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-65645201

... Gravity Smart Campus, Somerset... up to 9,000 jobs...

No announcement yet. Some bright spark (!) might use the Prime Minister's visit to the USA as the hook for one.

Jonathan

[al_yrpal]

Exellent strategy to have an EU alternative to put the squeeze on the Government to extract maximum subsidies.
9000 jobs means thousands more houses which are already severely blotting the landscape around here.

Al

[harriedgary]

it does seem like the torys (read ukip) have decided to go all out broke to get the indigenous unemployed into work no matter what the cost to the country (not withstanding the greatest benefit expenditure is actually on pensions, not unemployment)
Before we had low paid migrant workers doing the back breaking jobs we brits didn't want, i.e long hours in fields picking tates and colli.
Now we are actively seeking highly skilled immigrant workers to take the jobs we haven't been training our lot for, while stopping the migrant workers from doing the low paid jobs we don't want to do.

Make sense? Not to me unless you really do believe the torys want the unemployed in work at ANY cost.
Meanwhile, in case you haven't got a degree in economics, if you attract high paid migrant workers into your country, one effect is that housing costs will increase, as they want decent homes and so compete in a limited space with others. The low paid field workers from 5 years ago, they didn't care too much because they were only staying a few years to make a bundle before going onto better things. So they happily shared houses.

The problem for our unemployed lot is, that unless they are given a real, solid, substantial, genuine route upwards, then a field worker today is what they will remain 20 years later. And 20 years of working in a field is never going to get you your own home because the cost of housing goes up faster than you can save a deposit from what's left after you have paid your rent to someone buy to letting and getting you to pay their mortgage for them thank you very much.

That's one reason why the unemployed don't want to do field work. Because they already know it is, in itself a dead end job with no prospects, and no hope. No future.

I know the demographic of this forum is predominantly middle class. And it never ceases to amaze me when lecturing, how ignorant the one side is, of the other side's situation. 'let them eat cake'
50 years ago a hard working man (yes man because we're talking pre sex equality) could if he chose to be frugal and didn't get ill or sacked, save up and then get a house on a working man's wage. Wages have gone up since, but property prices have gone up faster. Now hard working people cannot afford to buy their own property. Too many people are either been trolls over this, or plain ignorant. Minimum wage is what many working class people earn. There are only so many days in the week, so many hours in the day. And not many people can sustain a long working week.

Confirmation bias: when you support your own belief with one example.
Oh but people can work 2 or 3 jobs. OH yes? Few can. It is draining. When I was younger long before the NMW and working time directive, I worked 2 and sometimes 3 jobs. It was bloody tiring. And I eventually collapsed. Did you hear me shouting out about how I managed to buy a house, start a business and become a millionaire by working 70 to 110 hours a week?
NO. Because I didn't. They were low paid jobs. I had expenses in doing the jobs, I had to pay tax, I had rent to pay. And by flogging myself to near death, it meant I couldn't focus on moving up.
What's the fastest 100m sprint in the world?
9.58 seconds
OK, now you go ahead and sprint in that time! You can't, oh, why not?
Because you are not unique, or super human, Just human. You hear about the fastest man on earth, you don't hear about the billions that would take 20 seconds to sprint 100m. That's confirmation bias in action. 9.58 seconds is staggering fast. It's actually faster than most of us normally cycle at if you work it out in mph.

So no, the average person isn't capable of working enough hours to compensate for low wages that don't match the very high property prices in England. A few can, they are the Olympic athletes. You hear about Olympic athletes because they are newsworthy. Who was second to walk on the moon.Quite a lot know that answer.
Ah, but who was number 5 to walk on the moon eh? Know that without googling it. And to become a NASA astronaut was to be the best of the best.

So what is the difference then? Support. That's the key. Have a partner = chances of success triple. Have better off parent = chances of success triple. Brexit won't cure our social ills, never was meant to. All a fudge. Going back to the EU won't change it either in fact. The only thing that will sort out our problems is a change in heart in this country about how we treat our neighbours. As long as critical needs are restricted by capitalist supply chains, then we will have social ills. Do you think the poorest are happy? You better not as you won't see the coming revolution then, They are revolting slowly, but surely. If we don't share out the profits of labour among those who labour, then we will all suffer.

The question posed almost sounds like a typical supporter of brexit's lance at remainers. Poke fun and abuse at those who disagree. Just remember though it was fine cut in the vote before the lies were revealed. Only 2% in it. Hardly a true mandate to fundamentally change the social and economic well being of the country.

[Jdsk]

Today's rumours include £500M of subsidy:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... lant-in-uk

Of course production in the UK would directly affect the tariffs related to the rules of origin in the TCA. But it won't reduce the pressure to shift the dates of increment because they're due before there'll be significant production from this factory. if it's built.

BBC News summarising the rumours:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-65645201

... Gravity Smart Campus, Somerset... up to 9,000 jobs...

No announcement yet. Some bright spark (!) might use the Prime Minister's visit to the USA as the hook for one.

"The boss of one of the UK’s last battery manufacturers, AMTE Power, has threatened to build its new planned factory overseas, should the UK fail to boost subsidies to levels competitive with the European Union (EU) and US.":
https://www.cityam.com/amte-boss-threat ... verseas-1/

Jonathan

[Jon in Sweden]

it does seem like the torys (read ukip) have decided to go all out broke to get the indigenous unemployed into work no matter what the cost to the country (not withstanding the greatest benefit expenditure is actually on pensions, not unemployment)
Before we had low paid migrant workers doing the back breaking jobs we brits didn't want, i.e long hours in fields picking tates and colli.
Now we are actively seeking highly skilled immigrant workers to take the jobs we haven't been training our lot for, while stopping the migrant workers from doing the low paid jobs we don't want to do.

Make sense? Not to me unless you really do believe the torys want the unemployed in work at ANY cost.
Meanwhile, in case you haven't got a degree in economics, if you attract high paid migrant workers into your country, one effect is that housing costs will increase, as they want decent homes and so compete in a limited space with others. The low paid field workers from 5 years ago, they didn't care too much because they were only staying a few years to make a bundle before going onto better things. So they happily shared houses.

The problem for our unemployed lot is, that unless they are given a real, solid, substantial, genuine route upwards, then a field worker today is what they will remain 20 years later. And 20 years of working in a field is never going to get you your own home because the cost of housing goes up faster than you can save a deposit from what's left after you have paid your rent to someone buy to letting and getting you to pay their mortgage for them thank you very much.

That's one reason why the unemployed don't want to do field work. Because they already know it is, in itself a dead end job with no prospects, and no hope. No future.

I know the demographic of this forum is predominantly middle class. And it never ceases to amaze me when lecturing, how ignorant the one side is, of the other side's situation. 'let them eat cake'
50 years ago a hard working man (yes man because we're talking pre sex equality) could if he chose to be frugal and didn't get ill or sacked, save up and then get a house on a working man's wage. Wages have gone up since, but property prices have gone up faster. Now hard working people cannot afford to buy their own property. Too many people are either been trolls over this, or plain ignorant. Minimum wage is what many working class people earn. There are only so many days in the week, so many hours in the day. And not many people can sustain a long working week.

Confirmation bias: when you support your own belief with one example.
Oh but people can work 2 or 3 jobs. OH yes? Few can. It is draining. When I was younger long before the NMW and working time directive, I worked 2 and sometimes 3 jobs. It was bloody tiring. And I eventually collapsed. Did you hear me shouting out about how I managed to buy a house, start a business and become a millionaire by working 70 to 110 hours a week?
NO. Because I didn't. They were low paid jobs. I had expenses in doing the jobs, I had to pay tax, I had rent to pay. And by flogging myself to near death, it meant I couldn't focus on moving up.
What's the fastest 100m sprint in the world?
9.58 seconds
OK, now you go ahead and sprint in that time! You can't, oh, why not?
Because you are not unique, or super human, Just human. You hear about the fastest man on earth, you don't hear about the billions that would take 20 seconds to sprint 100m. That's confirmation bias in action. 9.58 seconds is staggering fast. It's actually faster than most of us normally cycle at if you work it out in mph.

So no, the average person isn't capable of working enough hours to compensate for low wages that don't match the very high property prices in England. A few can, they are the Olympic athletes. You hear about Olympic athletes because they are newsworthy. Who was second to walk on the moon.Quite a lot know that answer.
Ah, but who was number 5 to walk on the moon eh? Know that without googling it. And to become a NASA astronaut was to be the best of the best.

So what is the difference then? Support. That's the key. Have a partner = chances of success triple. Have better off parent = chances of success triple. Brexit won't cure our social ills, never was meant to. All a fudge. Going back to the EU won't change it either in fact. The only thing that will sort out our problems is a change in heart in this country about how we treat our neighbours. As long as critical needs are restricted by capitalist supply chains, then we will have social ills. Do you think the poorest are happy? You better not as you won't see the coming revolution then, They are revolting slowly, but surely. If we don't share out the profits of labour among those who labour, then we will all suffer.

The question posed almost sounds like a typical supporter of brexit's lance at remainers. Poke fun and abuse at those who disagree. Just remember though it was fine cut in the vote before the lies were revealed. Only 2% in it. Hardly a true mandate to fundamentally change the social and economic well being of the country.

What a great post. I completely agree and thanks for taking the time to write it.

[ANTONISH]

it does seem like the torys (read ukip) have decided to go all out broke to get the indigenous unemployed into work no matter what the cost to the country (not withstanding the greatest benefit expenditure is actually on pensions, not unemployment)
Before we had low paid migrant workers doing the back breaking jobs we brits didn't want, i.e long hours in fields picking tates and colli.
Now we are actively seeking highly skilled immigrant workers to take the jobs we haven't been training our lot for, while stopping the migrant workers from doing the low paid jobs we don't want to do.

Make sense? Not to me unless you really do believe the torys want the unemployed in work at ANY cost.
Meanwhile, in case you haven't got a degree in economics, if you attract high paid migrant workers into your country, one effect is that housing costs will increase, as they want decent homes and so compete in a limited space with others. The low paid field workers from 5 years ago, they didn't care too much because they were only staying a few years to make a bundle before going onto better things. So they happily shared houses.

The problem for our unemployed lot is, that unless they are given a real, solid, substantial, genuine route upwards, then a field worker today is what they will remain 20 years later. And 20 years of working in a field is never going to get you your own home because the cost of housing goes up faster than you can save a deposit from what's left after you have paid your rent to someone buy to letting and getting you to pay their mortgage for them thank you very much.

That's one reason why the unemployed don't want to do field work. Because they already know it is, in itself a dead end job with no prospects, and no hope. No future.

I know the demographic of this forum is predominantly middle class. And it never ceases to amaze me when lecturing, how ignorant the one side is, of the other side's situation. 'let them eat cake'
50 years ago a hard working man (yes man because we're talking pre sex equality) could if he chose to be frugal and didn't get ill or sacked, save up and then get a house on a working man's wage. Wages have gone up since, but property prices have gone up faster. Now hard working people cannot afford to buy their own property. Too many people are either been trolls over this, or plain ignorant. Minimum wage is what many working class people earn. There are only so many days in the week, so many hours in the day. And not many people can sustain a long working week.

Confirmation bias: when you support your own belief with one example.
Oh but people can work 2 or 3 jobs. OH yes? Few can. It is draining. When I was younger long before the NMW and working time directive, I worked 2 and sometimes 3 jobs. It was bloody tiring. And I eventually collapsed. Did you hear me shouting out about how I managed to buy a house, start a business and become a millionaire by working 70 to 110 hours a week?
NO. Because I didn't. They were low paid jobs. I had expenses in doing the jobs, I had to pay tax, I had rent to pay. And by flogging myself to near death, it meant I couldn't focus on moving up.
What's the fastest 100m sprint in the world?
9.58 seconds
OK, now you go ahead and sprint in that time! You can't, oh, why not?
Because you are not unique, or super human, Just human. You hear about the fastest man on earth, you don't hear about the billions that would take 20 seconds to sprint 100m. That's confirmation bias in action. 9.58 seconds is staggering fast. It's actually faster than most of us normally cycle at if you work it out in mph.

So no, the average person isn't capable of working enough hours to compensate for low wages that don't match the very high property prices in England. A few can, they are the Olympic athletes. You hear about Olympic athletes because they are newsworthy. Who was second to walk on the moon.Quite a lot know that answer.
Ah, but who was number 5 to walk on the moon eh? Know that without googling it. And to become a NASA astronaut was to be the best of the best.

So what is the difference then? Support. That's the key. Have a partner = chances of success triple. Have better off parent = chances of success triple. Brexit won't cure our social ills, never was meant to. All a fudge. Going back to the EU won't change it either in fact. The only thing that will sort out our problems is a change in heart in this country about how we treat our neighbours. As long as critical needs are restricted by capitalist supply chains, then we will have social ills. Do you think the poorest are happy? You better not as you won't see the coming revolution then, They are revolting slowly, but surely. If we don't share out the profits of labour among those who labour, then we will all suffer.

The question posed almost sounds like a typical supporter of brexit's lance at remainers. Poke fun and abuse at those who disagree. Just remember though it was fine cut in the vote before the lies were revealed. Only 2% in it. Hardly a true mandate to fundamentally change the social and economic well being of the country.

Yes I agree with your analysis - mind you I'm a Brexit supporter - but not for the presumed reasons expounded by the remainers who predominate on this forum.
My father bought a house in 1936 for £300 which was about twice his annual income.
My ex wife and I bought a house in 1972 for about three times our combined income.
With the sale, and non replacement of social housing ( a Thatcher deal with the treasury done behind the back of Michael Hesseltine) we are now in the situation where the cost of a house is a virtually unattainable multiple of joint incomes.

[al_yrpal]

Ridiculous house prices have been caused by ultra low interest rates. Chickens coming home to roost now. Fortunately no one in close family needs a mortgage. Even in the outer south east prices are crazy which is why loads of people are heading to worzle country etc.... Forests of For Sale signs in South Potholeshire yesterday!

Al

[ANTONISH]

Ridiculous house prices have been caused by ultra low interest rates. Chickens coming home to roost now. Fortunately no one in close family needs a mortgage. Even in the outer south east prices are crazy which is why loads of people are heading to worzle country etc.... Forests of For Sale signs in South Potholeshire yesterday!

Al

I would suggest that the primary problem is a shortage of supply.
Unfortunately housing has become a commodity to be traded like any others - hence absentee foreign speculators buying property and leaving it empty.
there is also the massive shortfall in social housing.
Even with the relatively low interest rates a mortgage would be beyond the reach of many - and as for a deposit?

[Stevek76]

Interest rates certainly won't have helped but any rise of them now should bear in mind the consequences of that rise in relation to current house prices and affordability and I don't that's really being thought through.

The root problem of this in my view has for some time been the pseudo independence of the BoE with inflation being their problem but them only having interest rates to deal with it with the flawed economic belief that interest rates are the sole/best way to control inflation.

Throughout recent times there's been the impossible situation of house price inflation needing higher rates but the general economy needing lower rates, the bank went with the latter but the government should have dealt with the former and hasn't. I doubt that was helped by the number of MPs who are mini landlords or busy swapping second homes.

[Nearholmer]

IMO, at the level of economics, it’s pretty basic:

- constrained supply;

- rising demand due to population growth, with hot-spots in particular places as a result of differential job prospects across the country, differential wants to retire to particular places, and other similar factors;

- cost of purchase (capital + interest) rises to the point where supply and demand match, which is above the level that many people in many places can afford;

- exacerbated by two factors: ease of borrowing for “buy to let” in recent decades (although that probably no longer applies); and, the net transfer of wealth to those who already owned property prior to 2008 as a result of low interest rates and QE that were used to stabilise the system following the bank collapses etc, which has fuelled second-home purchase, and is now unravelling as interest rates are used to brake inflation.

How to sort that lot out?

Anything but simple, but we could start by:

- trying to spread job opportunities more evenly across the country to reduce hot-spotting;

- a big public-sector house-building programme to increase supply;

- adopt some new/different ownership/tenancy models, perhaps learning from some good examples in terms of lease-held retirement homes where the background landlord is a publicly accountable trust;

- absolute, rock-solid ban on owning more than one home (putting rules round that would be complicated);

- using some form that of wealth tax to recover from those who disproportionately benefitted from post-2008 policies some of their un-earned gains to pay for some of this (bl@@dy complicated to put rules around);

- making some difficult decisions about permitting zoned home-building in retirement hot-spots (this is really challenging because people like to retire to rural-shire, which then isn’t if it’s all built upon).

Why isn’t that going to happen without a great deal of fuss and agitation?

Because there are so many people with vested interests in perpetuating the present mess, while wringing their hands about it.

By that, I don’t only mean some stock “evil” figures like off-shore speculators, but a large proportion of the population: many home owners and mortgage-payers who are already “in the system”; people who inherit substantial capital sums; people who don’t want another housing estate in their back-yard; people who see redistributive taxation as theft from them to sponsor lazy devils; etc. Thats a lot of people, maybe half the population.

As a footnote: if you look back across history, the post-WW2 decades have been unusual in housing terms in the UK, because up to then a significant proportion of the population lived in some sort of housing insecurity, had ‘tied homes’ linked to their job, which was very much a double-edged sword, and/or lived in homes that were of atrocious quality, even by the standards of the day. The present challenge, as on so many fronts, is to arrest and reverse a slide back to the “natural state” of the country, which was one of stark division of wealth, health, domestic security etc.

[reohn2]

it does seem like the torys (read ukip) have decided to go all out broke to get the indigenous unemployed into work no matter what the cost to the country (not withstanding the greatest benefit expenditure is actually on pensions, not unemployment)
Before we had low paid migrant workers doing the back breaking jobs we brits didn't want, i.e long hours in fields picking tates and colli.
Now we are actively seeking highly skilled immigrant workers to take the jobs we haven't been training our lot for, while stopping the migrant workers from doing the low paid jobs we don't want to do.

Make sense? Not to me unless you really do believe the torys want the unemployed in work at ANY cost.
Meanwhile, in case you haven't got a degree in economics, if you attract high paid migrant workers into your country, one effect is that housing costs will increase, as they want decent homes and so compete in a limited space with others. The low paid field workers from 5 years ago, they didn't care too much because they were only staying a few years to make a bundle before going onto better things. So they happily shared houses.

The problem for our unemployed lot is, that unless they are given a real, solid, substantial, genuine route upwards, then a field worker today is what they will remain 20 years later. And 20 years of working in a field is never going to get you your own home because the cost of housing goes up faster than you can save a deposit from what's left after you have paid your rent to someone buy to letting and getting you to pay their mortgage for them thank you very much.

That's one reason why the unemployed don't want to do field work. Because they already know it is, in itself a dead end job with no prospects, and no hope. No future.

I know the demographic of this forum is predominantly middle class. And it never ceases to amaze me when lecturing, how ignorant the one side is, of the other side's situation. 'let them eat cake'
50 years ago a hard working man (yes man because we're talking pre sex equality) could if he chose to be frugal and didn't get ill or sacked, save up and then get a house on a working man's wage. Wages have gone up since, but property prices have gone up faster. Now hard working people cannot afford to buy their own property. Too many people are either been trolls over this, or plain ignorant. Minimum wage is what many working class people earn. There are only so many days in the week, so many hours in the day. And not many people can sustain a long working week.

Confirmation bias: when you support your own belief with one example.
Oh but people can work 2 or 3 jobs. OH yes? Few can. It is draining. When I was younger long before the NMW and working time directive, I worked 2 and sometimes 3 jobs. It was bloody tiring. And I eventually collapsed. Did you hear me shouting out about how I managed to buy a house, start a business and become a millionaire by working 70 to 110 hours a week?
NO. Because I didn't. They were low paid jobs. I had expenses in doing the jobs, I had to pay tax, I had rent to pay. And by flogging myself to near death, it meant I couldn't focus on moving up.
What's the fastest 100m sprint in the world?
9.58 seconds
OK, now you go ahead and sprint in that time! You can't, oh, why not?
Because you are not unique, or super human, Just human. You hear about the fastest man on earth, you don't hear about the billions that would take 20 seconds to sprint 100m. That's confirmation bias in action. 9.58 seconds is staggering fast. It's actually faster than most of us normally cycle at if you work it out in mph.

So no, the average person isn't capable of working enough hours to compensate for low wages that don't match the very high property prices in England. A few can, they are the Olympic athletes. You hear about Olympic athletes because they are newsworthy. Who was second to walk on the moon.Quite a lot know that answer.
Ah, but who was number 5 to walk on the moon eh? Know that without googling it. And to become a NASA astronaut was to be the best of the best.

So what is the difference then? Support. That's the key. Have a partner = chances of success triple. Have better off parent = chances of success triple. Brexit won't cure our social ills, never was meant to. All a fudge. Going back to the EU won't change it either in fact. The only thing that will sort out our problems is a change in heart in this country about how we treat our neighbours. As long as critical needs are restricted by capitalist supply chains, then we will have social ills. Do you think the poorest are happy? You better not as you won't see the coming revolution then, They are revolting slowly, but surely. If we don't share out the profits of labour among those who labour, then we will all suffer.

The question posed almost sounds like a typical supporter of brexit's lance at remainers. Poke fun and abuse at those who disagree. Just remember though it was fine cut in the vote before the lies were revealed. Only 2% in it. Hardly a true mandate to fundamentally change the social and economic well being of the country.

What a great post. I completely agree and thanks for taking the time to write it.

I agree wholeheartedly,a good assessment of the way this country has gone to the dogs and unless there's some fundamental change to the way it's governed and capitalist extremes are reeled in at some point the people will rebel,I can only hope it's peaceful!