stderr
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 6:44 pm

hippy wrote:
Massi wrote:the petition is ridiculous.
It is ridiculous in what it asks for but that's not really the point. It has become a "this isn't right" banner for those who aren't happy to congregate under and get that on the agenda. Parliament and everyone else knows why it's being supported and will no doubt consider that sentiment in due course.
Apparently the latest, if you can believe The Express: "EUROPEAN political chiefs are to take advantage of Brexit by unveiling their long-held plan to morph the continent’s countries into one GIANT SUPERSTATE". I always believe websites that like to use lots of normal words in all caps.

hippy
Posts: 5610
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 10:34 pm
Location: UK

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:08 pm

stderr wrote:if you can believe The Express...
Well they did PREDICT that 92% would VOTE to leave the EU :roll:

IMO, commentators on the Express site make those on the Daily Mail site look positively classy. I do however have to applaud them for removing all the calls to kill David Lammy MP after he said there should be a second referendum.

W. H. Heydt
Posts: 10618
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:36 pm
Location: Vallejo, CA (US)

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:48 pm

I saw a report this morning that petition was started several weeks *before* the vote, so the call for a minimum 75% turnout and 60% favorable as a condition to act on the referendum was, actually, timely and not an attempt at an ex post facto effort.

User avatar
joan
Posts: 14093
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: UK

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:53 pm

W. H. Heydt wrote:I saw a report this morning that petition was started several weeks *before* the vote, so the call for a minimum 75% turnout and 60% favorable as a condition to act on the referendum was, actually, timely and not an attempt at an ex post facto effort.
True, but still irrelevant. The rules are set before the campaign starts. It is no use complaining you don't like the rules after you have lost the vote.

User avatar
Burngate
Posts: 5939
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:34 pm
Location: Berkshire UK Tralfamadore
Contact: Website

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 9:32 pm

England 1, Iceland 2
We need a replay.

User avatar
joan
Posts: 14093
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: UK

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 9:46 pm

Burngate wrote:England 1, Iceland 2
We need a replay.
I'll start a petition saying that English goals should be worth 10 Iceland goals. That's democracy.

Iceland played well. We had moments of okay interspersed by long moments of not okay. Iceland had a thoroughly deserved win, they were by far the better team.

User avatar
kusti8
Posts: 3439
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 5:29 pm
Location: USA

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 9:49 pm

Burngate wrote:England 1, Iceland 2
We need a replay.
It was an amazing game. The English coach who is paid 3.5 million pounds lost to an Icelandic coach who works part time as a dentist. :lol:
There are 10 types of people: those who understand binary and those who don't.

stderr
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 9:57 pm

kusti8 wrote:
Burngate wrote:England 1, Iceland 2
We need a replay.
It was an amazing game. The English coach who is paid 3.5 million pounds lost to an Icelandic coach who works part time as a dentist. :lol:
Evidence for the randomness of soccer. Either make the goal as wide as the field or make the goalie walk around on stilts.

W. H. Heydt
Posts: 10618
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:36 pm
Location: Vallejo, CA (US)

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:02 pm

joan wrote:
W. H. Heydt wrote:I saw a report this morning that petition was started several weeks *before* the vote, so the call for a minimum 75% turnout and 60% favorable as a condition to act on the referendum was, actually, timely and not an attempt at an ex post facto effort.
True, but still irrelevant. The rules are set before the campaign starts. It is no use complaining you don't like the rules after you have lost the vote.
At this point, possibly. The point being that the request to set a minimum turnout and minimum winning condition *was* requested well before the vote. It wasn't an "oops, we lost" thing by the original petitioner. The explosion if people and bots signing on...yeah, that's all after the fact. The *petition* was (reasonably) timely, the mass response, not so much.

asandford
Posts: 1997
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: Waterlooville

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:32 pm

W. H. Heydt wrote:I saw a report this morning that petition was started several weeks *before* the vote, so the call for a minimum 75% turnout and 60% favorable as a condition to act on the referendum was, actually, timely and not an attempt at an ex post facto effort.
And the bloke who started it voted 'leave' and it was set up in the event that 'remain' won with a narrow margin.

asandford
Posts: 1997
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: Waterlooville

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:43 pm

Massi wrote: leave won. Now leave. Now.
Such compassion...

stderr
Posts: 2178
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 11:29 pm

Re: Supply chain

Mon Jun 27, 2016 11:46 pm

W. H. Heydt wrote:At this point, possibly. The point being that the request to set a minimum turnout and minimum winning condition *was* requested well before the vote.
I'm sure that any side of any vote would love to be able to set the "winning" condition for the other side higher than 50% plus 1 vote. The US doesn't have referenda, or God forbid initiatives, at the federal level because the whole idea is idiotic and this is proved again and again at the state level.

At the state level, where no international incidences are likely, the next step would be the lawsuits. They would attempt, more than likely, to claim that the whole initiative or referendum or some part of it that would invalidate the whole are somehow unconstitutional. Of course the courts refuse to even provisionally rule on this before the election so it's mostly a waste of time for all involved.

I'm not sure why no one seems to be talking about lawsuits yet in this mess, there's nothing like a good bit of legal wrangling to really gum up the works. Which would, of course, then mean that a new government might be willing to give a new vote on the question. Of course no government in the UK in the fullness of time will ever again ask the people a question that they don't really want to know the answer to.

asandford
Posts: 1997
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: Waterlooville

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 12:07 am

stderr wrote: I'm not sure why no one seems to be talking about lawsuits yet in this mess, there's nothing like a good bit of legal wrangling to really gum up the works. Which would, of course, then mean that a new government might be willing to give a new vote on the question. Of course no government in the UK in the fullness of time will ever again ask the people a question that they don't really want to know the answer to.
I'm sure that Nicola Sturgeon is considering it. The govt. must act in the best interests of the country and the people, and in this case (post-Brexit vote chaos), I don't see that it is.

W. H. Heydt
Posts: 10618
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2012 7:36 pm
Location: Vallejo, CA (US)

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 1:43 am

stderr wrote:
W. H. Heydt wrote:At this point, possibly. The point being that the request to set a minimum turnout and minimum winning condition *was* requested well before the vote.
I'm sure that any side of any vote would love to be able to set the "winning" condition for the other side higher than 50% plus 1 vote. The US doesn't have referenda, or God forbid initiatives, at the federal level because the whole idea is idiotic and this is proved again and again at the state level.
Nationally, no, but many states have referendum laws of various sorts. In addition, where I live (California) some ballot propositions require a 2/3 affirmative vote to go into effect. So, yes, more than "50% plus 1" *does* exist.
At the state level, where no international incidences are likely, the next step would be the lawsuits. They would attempt, more than likely, to claim that the whole initiative or referendum or some part of it that would invalidate the whole are somehow unconstitutional. Of course the courts refuse to even provisionally rule on this before the election so it's mostly a waste of time for all involved.
It gets done in both state and Federal courts. Since it was a state constitutional amendment, the California State Supreme Court declined to overturn Prop. 8, but the Federal case (based on the equal protection of due process requirements in the US Constitution) saw it overturned, appealed--where the appellate court ruled on much narrower grounds (that you can't take away a right once recognized), and the appeal ruled invalid by SCOTUS on the grounds that the defendants (trying to uphold Prop. 8) lacked standing to appeal. (In the original action, the Governor--Schartzenaegger--and Attorney General--Brown--declined to defend it. In the appeal, the Governor--Brown--and the AG--Harris--declined to defend it.)
I'm not sure why no one seems to be talking about lawsuits yet in this mess, there's nothing like a good bit of legal wrangling to really gum up the works. Which would, of course, then mean that a new government might be willing to give a new vote on the question. Of course no government in the UK in the fullness of time will ever again ask the people a question that they don't really want to know the answer to.
I have seen articles indicating that the Scottish First Minister believes that the Scottish Parliament has to assent for the UK to leave the EU, and Scotland voted to remain.

User avatar
joan
Posts: 14093
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: UK

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 4:52 am

Electoral law is really not as difficult to understand as some are finding.

I'm quite happy if the sentiments in the petition are put into place for future polls. When the petitioners think it through they may not be quite so sanguine.

fruit-uk
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2014 4:19 pm
Location: Suffolk, UK

Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:07 am

asandford wrote:
Massi wrote: leave won. Now leave. Now.
Such compassion...
One can see his point, he's worried about losing money, see viewtopic.php?p=1001102#p1001102

My guess is that ,many voting Leave don't worrry about how their stocks are doing, they have none, they are more likely to be worrying about having enough money to buy food, pay rent and other bills.

jahboater
Posts: 4595
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 6:56 am

joan wrote:Electoral law is really not as difficult to understand as some are finding.
Perhaps because it is a referendum and not an election.
This particular referendum result is not legally binding and the government is under no legal obligation to follow through with its outcome. "The referendum is advisory rather than mandatory.
Nicola Sturgeon does seem adamant that Scotland at least can remain in the EU.
Who knows?

Massi
Posts: 1691
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 1:52 pm
Location: Italy

Re:

Tue Jun 28, 2016 7:43 am

fruit-uk wrote:
asandford wrote:
Massi wrote: leave won. Now leave. Now.
Such compassion...
One can see his point, he's worried about losing money, see viewtopic.php?p=1001102#p1001102

My guess is that ,many voting Leave don't worrry about how their stocks are doing, they have none, they are more likely to be worrying about having enough money to buy food, pay rent and other bills.
it's not only a matter of losing money.
For sure i'm not happy to lose money because of the decision of British people (since my stocks are not exposed to GBP or to british market, this is only fear and speculation)
but more than this, i can't understand why now your government is trying to take time in any way.

as we said in another topic, it seems that now "you" (general) want your wife drunk and your barrel full of wine.
This is not fair.
"you" want to make your own laws and regulations, but also to freely access the EU market.
Not fair again.
The vote has been done. Now it's time to take its consequences. For the benefit of everyone.

User avatar
paddyg
Posts: 2332
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 11:57 am
Location: UK

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 9:12 am

The vote has been done. Now it's time to take its consequences. For the benefit of everyone.
Even though I think it was a bad decision, the worst thing that could happen now would be for us to not leave on some fuzzy technical nicety. Given that a lot of people voted because they felt that the democratic process wasn't representing them (mixed with a bit of nationalism) overturning the referendum result would lead very soon to non-peaceful action which would leave things open for a charismatic, newly elected 'strong' leader to set up an emergency cabinet with powers to get things done without being held back by the rest of parliament. It's happened before!

I'm afraid to rid ourselves of this cancer we have to suffer in the medium term.
also https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en-GB&fromgroups=#!forum/pi3d

User avatar
Burngate
Posts: 5939
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:34 pm
Location: Berkshire UK Tralfamadore
Contact: Website

Re: Re:

Tue Jun 28, 2016 9:29 am

Massi wrote:leave won. Now leave. Now.
... I can't understand why now your government is trying to take time in any way.
as we said in another topic, it seems that now "you" (general) want your wife drunk and your barrel full of wine.
This is not fair.
Also not relevant.
"you" want to make your own laws and regulations, but also to freely access the EU market.
Not fair again.
Fairness doesn't come into it.
The vote has been done. Now it's time to take its consequences. For the benefit of everyone.
If our government, or the EU hierarchy, decided to take that view, and insisted we left straight away, we would indeed "take the consequences" - which could be quite dire, not only for the UK but also for the remainder of the EU. But an orderly exit can and will benefit both sides.

Without proper protocols in place, you could not sell us Fiat cars or Chianti Classico Reserva, nor could you buy our ... well, we don't make wine worth the label, but you take my meaning.

Also, Airbus would have to stop making A800s, because we're the ones making the wings at the moment.
Sure, in time, another supplier could be found. Maybe Italy could start making them. But not straight away - it would take time to sort it.
Meanwhile, no planes would get built.

It's not just money. Trade barriers don't consist of just money. How does the EU certify that the Airbus wings comply with the laid-down standards, when suddenly those standards don't exist?
If an Airbus falls out of the sky because of a faulty wing, who do you sue? Not us - we've got nothing to do with it any more.
And don't talk about International law - that's just a convenient umbrella for bilateral agreements, and can be - and often is - ignored when it's convenient.

Massi
Posts: 1691
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 1:52 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 9:42 am

i'm not saying it will be easy
i'm not saying it will not have bad consequences on both parts
but the worst we can do (we all in europe.. yes, you are in europe too :)) is.. do nothing..
This would really open the way for the death of EU

It seems that juncker, Merkel, Hollande (and also my PM lol) - at least in speeches - see it in this way. And it seems that GB government is trying to obtain unofficial evaluations. Not fair again.

You have to assume the role of "extra ue" country. And, again, the sooner the better.

Where we see things differently is the consecutio of actions.
You say: we'll leave when we'll have all bilateral agreements in place and we will be happy about them (and in the meantime? do you want to be free to do what you want, i suspect)
I say: the vote has been done. Exit, and then start making bilateral agreements. In the meatine, you are out of EU as the vote stated.
Or, at least, activate immediately art. 50, knowing that within 2 years in a way or another you'll be out.

(as said, this will be a problem for all of us, not only you)

PS: And you also have to consider that losing FIAT auto is a big advantage :lol:

PPS: i work in the financial industry. Some of my customers are branches of english investment firms. It's a nosense at all to think you can do what you want untill you'll be happy of agreements. This would be a never ending story..

User avatar
joan
Posts: 14093
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: UK

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:17 am

Massi wrote:i'm not saying it will be easy
i'm not saying it will not have bad consequences on both parts
but the worst we can do (we all in europe.. yes, you are in europe too :)) is.. do nothing..
This would really open the way for the death of EU

It seems that juncker, Merkel, Hollande (and also my PM lol) - at least in speeches - see it in this way. And it seems that GB government is trying to obtain unofficial evaluations. Not fair again.

You have to assume the role of "extra ue" country. And, again, the sooner the better.

Where we see things differently is the consecutio of actions.
You say: we'll leave when we'll have all bilateral agreements in place and we will be happy about them (and in the meantime? do you want to be free to do what you want, i suspect)
I say: the vote has been done. Exit, and then start making bilateral agreements. In the meatine, you are out of EU as the vote stated.
Or, at least, activate immediately art. 50, knowing that within 2 years in a way or another you'll be out.

(as said, this will be a problem for all of us, not only you)

PS: And you also have to consider that losing FIAT auto is a big advantage :lol:

PPS: i work in the financial industry. Some of my customers are branches of english investment firms. It's a nosense at all to think you can do what you want untill you'll be happy of agreements. This would be a never ending story..
With political will on both sides there could be a deal today although I think it highly unlikely.

If the 27 say okay the negotiation period is 2 years plus 4 months, I can't see how the UK could then refuse to start the article 50 process.

Massi
Posts: 1691
Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 1:52 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:20 am

joan wrote: I can't see how the UK could then refuse to start the article 50 process.
am i wrong or Cameron clearly stated that yesterday?

jamesh
Raspberry Pi Engineer & Forum Moderator
Raspberry Pi Engineer & Forum Moderator
Posts: 23083
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:23 am

Can you PLEASE stop tarring the entire English populace with the same brush.

Only just over half the country voted out. The rest didn't.

And as for out right now - I suspect that would bring down the EU completely. It's shaky enough already. Hurrying at this point could be fatal for quite a number of countries.
Principal Software Engineer at Raspberry Pi (Trading) Ltd.
Contrary to popular belief, humorous signatures are allowed. Here's an example...
"My grief counseller just died, luckily, he was so good, I didn't care."

User avatar
joan
Posts: 14093
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: UK

Re: Supply chain

Tue Jun 28, 2016 10:24 am

jahboater wrote:
joan wrote:Electoral law is really not as difficult to understand as some are finding.
Perhaps because it is a referendum and not an election.
This particular referendum result is not legally binding and the government is under no legal obligation to follow through with its outcome. "The referendum is advisory rather than mandatory.
Nicola Sturgeon does seem adamant that Scotland at least can remain in the EU.
Who knows?
I'm fairly sure our MPs understand the meaning of advisory better than you or I.

Just this morning I had an unsolicited e-mail from my local MP saying that although they used their ONE vote for remain "The country has spoken and now I believe that decision must be respected and enacted."

Return to “Off topic discussion”