EU Referendum

[bonusmedia]

So...you ignore that I asked you to say which post you'd supposedly proven me wrong about the hero! Typical.

You think Hallstein is a random fact?

Well here are a few thousand other facts to go with it... http://www.eu-facts.org/en/background/dark_roots_europe_lecture.html

You must be sooo sure of yourself that you didn't even bother to look for any evidence to try and disprove what I wrote. You could've found that site in seconds on Google.

Bye bye.

I don't need to 'prove' you wrong any more than I need to prove that the sun isn't green. The only people supporting your assertion were a handful of deluded conspiracy theorists who have withdrawn the assertion because it turns out the man with the same name who died years ago was a different man.

The site you linked to is not a reliable source, it is the rantings of a madman who claimed the vitamins he sold would cure AIDS.

BULLSHIT.

Ask yourself why you need everything to be a conspiracy. I think psychologists suggest it gives people certainty in an uncertain world - we're hardwired to look for simplistic cause and effect and ill-equipped to deal with the level of complexity we face today

 

[websaway]

Despite the anti-german jibe this is a reasonably fair and honest argument, and I'm glad you realize that your position involves an economic trade-off.

We have a veto on any further integration and have already stated we are not going to be part of it. Our identity is not at risk. We retain parliamentary sovereignty, as we always have

No no no you don't understand do you. We don't have a veto on anything, we, the people, will not have a vote. Take for instance Turkey joining, the PM has already agreed to it, why would he veto it, by the time they admit them it will all be agreed. Whichever government is in will decide how they vote and everything is a trade off. You really are naïve as to how these things work and very easily led. You have just voted our democracy away, though it will take time for you to see it. But we did have a choice and it is how it is. Anybody under 35 won't even notice the difference, they will grow into it and of course accept the gradual change and erosion of our understanding of parliamentary democracy over the next 40 years. We either wanted to keep our sovereignty and voter determination or we didn't.
The greater powers do not think the future should be entirely in the hands of the electorate. You have surely seen a super state influenced by big business in this referendum. All big business and government funded experts dancing to the tune of money.
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
This is not sour grapes, and it will be so gradual it will not be noticed, it's a very gradual erosion of self determination.

 

[gimpydog]

First Labour ad I've seen online....

http://www.labourleave.org.uk/gotv_splash?splash=1

Better late than never.

 

[Edwin]

Odds heading the other way again - flurry of bets on leave

Probably weather-related. There's another massive band of rain heading for London at the height of the evening commute...

 

[Edwin]

Just because today's a very serious decision, doesn't mean there's not a bit of levity to be found around the edges...

93 year old mum meme
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...xit-eu-referendum_uk_576bd432e4b098ec71a0999b

 

[bonusmedia]

No no no you don't understand do you. We don't have a veto on anything, we, the people, will not have a vote. Take for instance Turkey joining, the PM has already agreed to it, why would he veto it, by the time they admit them it will all be agreed. Whichever government is in will decide how they vote and everything is a trade off. You really are naïve as to how these things work and very easily led. You have just voted our democracy away, though it will take time for you to see it. But we did have a choice and it is how it is. Anybody under 35 won't even notice the difference, they will grow into it and of course accept the gradual change and erosion of our understanding of parliamentary democracy over the next 40 years. We either wanted to keep our sovereignty and voter determination or we didn't.
The greater powers do not think the future should be entirely in the hands of the electorate. You have surely seen a super state influenced by big business in this referendum. All big business and government funded experts dancing to the tune of money.
He who pays the piper calls the tune.
This is not sour grapes, and it will be so gradual it will not be noticed, it's a very gradual erosion of self determination.

We, the people, will have a vote. We will elect politicians to make decisions for us, in the belief they have a fuller understanding, because it is their full time job and because they are, at least supposedly, better qualified. That is parliamentary democracy. We do not operate a system of referenda on everything, we do not live under mob rule.

Turkey may eventually join the EU, if it is in the interest of the EU. That's probably 20 years away, I'm not sure why you're so worried about it.

You repreatedly state that I am naïve, that I don't understand, that I am easily led. It is extremely patronising. I am an intelligent, accomplished adult. You would have far more impact by concentrating on the arguments over the insults.

 

[gimpydog]

Odds heading the other way again - flurry of bets on leave

I wish I knew enough about betting to know what this means...

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics...referendum/referendum-on-eu-membership-result

Good or bad?

 

[bonusmedia]

I wish I knew enough about betting to know what this means...

View attachment 1230 View attachment 1231
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics...referendum/referendum-on-eu-membership-result

Good or bad?

These are not genuine odds, it is a promotional offer to attract new customers and the amount you can bet is very limited

 

[Admin]

Err....if you could get those odds on both results then you'd be able to back both and guarantee a return...cant be right

 

[afx]

I wonder if there has ever been a case study which looked at whether betting odds can influence outcomes.

If the leave campaign had just taken a couple of million down the bookies and narrowed the odds, would it have made a leave result more likely by making it appear more credible?

Still desperately hoping that's what we get anyway, but we'll see. Did overhead a group of 50-60 ish year olds talking about how it wasn't their future, so that incitement of fear from the remain camp has obviously got through to some extent.

I don't believe a study is needed. I thought this was already pretty much known and accepted.

It's happened the other way around though. The big money has piled into remain.

Vested interests pool their cash to attempt to manipulate results by skewing "what the bookies say" due to most people assuming the bookies are never wrong. Happens all the time, and has happened over this vote. 62% of Ladbrokes bets have been placed on leave, but the odds are, (according to them) we're staying. Why ? Because the leavers bets are tiny relative to those who have placed big five figure bets on remain wildly skewing the odds to 76% in favour of remaining.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...merges-when-looking-behind-brexit-bookie-odds

 

[spiderspider]

Err....if you could get those odds on both results then you'd be able to back both and guarantee a return...cant be right

This is on their website:

'All winnings paid in free bets' '£10 max stake'

 

[gimpydog]

Err....if you could get those odds on both results then you'd be able to back both and guarantee a return...cant be right

I though 3/1 on remain looked generous, if it is as likely as they say. Just like buying money.

 

[gimpydog]

This is on their website:
View attachment 1232

'All winnings paid in free bets' '£10 max stake'

Bet £20 (£10 on each), get £40 back. Can't lose??

 

[bonusmedia]

I don't believe a study is needed. I thought this was already pretty much known and accepted.

It's happened the other way around though. The big money has piled into remain.

Vested interests pool their cash to attempt to manipulate results by skewing "what the bookies say" due to most people assuming the bookies are never wrong. Happens all the time, and has happened over this vote. 62% of Ladbrokes bets have been placed on leave, but the odds are, (according to them) we're staying. Why ? Because the leavers bets are tiny relative to those who have placed big five figure bets on remain wildly skewing the odds to 76% in favour of remaining.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...merges-when-looking-behind-brexit-bookie-odds

What evidence do you have that there is any attempt to influence the result?

The fact that there is a large amount of money being bet on remain does not indicate anything underhand - only that people who are prepared to bet a large amount of money see remain as the likely outcome.

I think this is a poor article by someone with little understanding of the bookmaking industry trying to create controversy

 

[bonusmedia]

Bet £20 (£10 on each), get £40 back. Can't lose??

No - £10 max stake all told.

They are giving money/value away to attract new customers, because a large enough % of those new customers will stick around to have a bet or two on the Euros and beyond.

Also your winnings are not paid as cash - they are free bets, so you then have to bet again

 

[gimpydog]

They are giving money/value away to attract new customers,

Who'd fall for a scheme like that?

 

[bonusmedia]

It's a good offer if you haven't already got a betfair account. Lots of very good bonuses about if you have the discipline to extract the maximum value and then stop. I got banned from most of the bookies doing this and ended up joining them

 

[Edwin]

I'd love to see people rocking up with quill and ink...
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-pencils-conspiracy-fears-social-media-voters

 

[BREWSTERS]

I don't need to 'prove' you wrong any more than I need to prove that the sun isn't green. The only people supporting your assertion were a handful of deluded conspiracy theorists who have withdrawn the assertion because it turns out the man with the same name who died years ago was a different man.

"It turns out"....is that it? Hahaha...not even quoting where you saw that?

The site you linked to is not a reliable source, it is the rantings of a madman who claimed the vitamins he sold would cure AIDS.

As ever, absolutely zip about the content (largely from documents declassified after 60 years), just attack the source. DEAL WITH THE CONTENT OR ARE YOU SCARED TO BE PROVEN WRONG,? Because I feel like that is your greatest fear.

BULLSHIT.

Ask yourself why you need everything to be a conspiracy. I think psychologists suggest it gives people certainty in an uncertain world - we're hardwired to look for simplistic cause and effect and ill-equipped to deal with the level of complexity we face today

We live in a world of corruption and deceipt. Follow the money.

 

[bonusmedia]

"It turns out"....is that it? Hahaha...not even quoting where you saw that?



As ever, absolutely zip about the content (largely from documents declassified after 60 years), just attack the source. DEAL WITH THE CONTENT OR ARE YOU SCARED TO BE PROVEN WRONG,? Because I feel like that is your greatest fear.



We live in a world of corruption and deceipt. Follow the money.

I am making this post right now. I don't need to quote a source to prove that. Are you seriously still trying to suggest that Bernard Kenny died years ago? That would give me serious concerns for your mental health.

The content is not RELIABLE, because it comes from a source with a proven history of MAKING UP BULLSHIT FOR MONEY. 'Dr Rath' claimed to be able to cure AIDS with vitamins and made millions selling his BULLSHIT CURES. He is responsible for deaths of a large number of AIDS patients. THIS IS NOT A GOOD SOURCE OF INFORMATION.

Seek help, your children deserve better