Leaderboard

Latest, a Bath penny Conder token, D&H 4

Firstly I will congratulate you on your weather - it's raining here, so I have all the time in the world. Given our current politicians, I think that we would be on a hiding to nothing if they had decided to go for a customs union. They weren't capable of putting their foot down when required and playing hardball, nor do I think they have the ability or the desire to stand up to the EU and negotiate anything for our benefit. It's the price you pay for putting the future in the hands of a group who profoundly disagree with the instructions of the referendum. My personal view is that we either get out properly, or stay in with a voice in order to mitigate the backlash. A customs union will tie our hands and give us nothing. I therefore still think the preferred option is to leave with no deal whether they like it or not. IF we end up with another referendum (which would be a travesty and presumably would have a predetermined outcome in case we were stupid enough to vote the same way), then if they really want to have any chance of closure, it will be imperative that no deal, remain or half-way house are all on the ballot paper. But I doubt they would have that wisdom. The EU has moved their institutions back to the mainland as is their right. They will certainly move to get as much of the financial sector moved to Paris or Frankfurt whether we stay or not. If the only options are a customs union or remaining, then it is also a case of accepting that we will continue to get a bad deal from Brussels, at which point we would be better in being the least bad option, but I wouldn't hold out any hope of them investing any EU funding or infrastructure in this country again. The old adage of keep your friends close and your enemies closer was never more appropriate. To fully extricate ourselves will probably require a new political party with both the desire and the balls to make it work. This undercurrent of discontent is a 46 year project in the making. For all bar one of these years (1974), we have paid in more than we have taken out. In that time, we have lost much of the infrastructure which would give us the ability to stand on our own two feet. Any other country would expect some sort of return for paying in, but we haven't really gained anything of substance in that time. I don't have a problem being a net contributor on occasion, but it does have to be offset on others by actually receiving benefits. In any system there are winners and losers, it's just that 17.4 million see no benefit, whilst only 16.1 million thought they were better off. Our problems are to some extent home grown because our politicians are too ideological, unlike the majority of the population who are generally middle of the road and value a good social policy but crucially recognise that it has to be paid for. Too many on both sides only see one half of the story. The Tories are called the 'nasty party' because they are perceived to be indifferent to social policy, whilst the Labour party is mainly concerned with taxing and spending money on benefits without expecting anything in return, living in cloud cuckoo land that you can turn on the spending tap at will without ever questioning whether wealth is being or can be generated. The system is broken, but given we all place a value on wealth and it pays for all consumption, you have to make it to spend it. So the question is, where should our priorities lie? The EU won't come riding to our rescue because we are only ever net contributors to the system, and going forward will be seeking even more from us. That is why a customs union is not a good idea.

I have always agreed with that approach, I either want the coin and will pay the price asked, or I will not. I have never understood the complaint over mark up, if you can buy something and sell it for more, surely that is good business sense.

The dictionary definition of 'traitor' is 'a person who betrays someone or something, such as a friend, cause, or principle.' Given that MPs voted for the referendum, voted to trigger A50 and stood on a manifesto of leaving the EU, I regard the definition as entirely appropriate when applied to somebody like Dominic Grieve, since he IS betraying everything he and his party has stood on. As are many of his colleagues in the Tory party. As for the next election, I'm entirely in favour of deselection and/or voting them out, but that is too little too late when they have betrayed the country regarding Brexit. If remain had won the referendum, then no, those still advocating 'leave' would not be traitors, since the decision to remain would have been immediately communicated to the EU i.e the referendum result would have been respected and from that point forward there is nothing undemocratic in continuing to press for a different outcome. However, since the matter would have been settled such a position would have gained little support even from those who wished to leave, for the simple reason that democracy would have been seen to be upheld and respected. The problem with the current situation is that we haven't left, leavers do not respect the result and are actively seeking to undermine it. If we do manage to leave, remainers are then quite entitled to campaign for us to re-join. There would be nothing traitorous in that. It is the failure to enact what they promised which, in my view, justifies my description of them.

I supect that, if the result had gone the other way, Coinery would have a different opinion on snapshot views.

It's the only way you can have a business

I don't care how much their mark-up is. That is their business and that is true for any dealer from whom I buy. I care that the coin is what they say it is, that the photos accurately represent it and that the price is one that I am willing to pay having done my research.

Sorry, but in my opinion MPs deserve every insult they get, when they don't do as they agreed to. I don't let them off anything. And as for them trying their best and having a conscience about how they are acting, that's the best laugh I've had all day. If they were trying their best they would be going for Brexit, not doing everything they can to thwart it, all the time trying to make out that they respect the vote. That latter is the most insulting comment they can make.

Oh, but the majority of voters do want it. It's the majority of remainers who don't want it, but they number less than those of us who voted to leave.

I wonder what day it was yesterday...

My question was of course rhetorical. But I will ask another question. If the customs union was passed last night and the government decide to adopt it. Do you think the UK would still be better off than remaining? There would be no famous "trade deals with other countries" and we lose our say in the EU. Hardly what the Leave group promised. Most people did not envisaged we would be in our current situation when we voted nearly 3 years ago. It's it really undemocratic to ask the people if they really prefer the final leaving arrangments than staying? It is not stopping Brexit. It is to prevent us accepting a situation that the majority of the people do not want. I will go out and enjoy the nice weather. Must resist talking Brexit.

Before the referendum, we discussed on this forum what would happen if the result was to stay. A view was that a vote had produced a decision and that the question would be put to bed for a generation. I concur with that view because I was prepared to accept the result unlike the current protagonists.

Yes, in an ideal world every point of view would be taken into account. But the nature of a referendum is to take a snapshot view at a given point in time, from those who are able and willing to vote. That's their very essence. There was a referendum in 1975 to confirm us staying in the then Common Market. I don't imagine too much thought was given then to the 33% who voted against, nor to those who didn't bother voting. Nor to those too young to vote at that time, or to those (including me) who were not yet born. As far as those who for whatever reason decide not to vote when they could do, I've got no time. Their opinion is the least important as they have passed up their opportunity of their volition. For those of a younger demographic who feel their opinion is more important than anybody else's - sorry, no. Democracy is based on every vote being of equal value, with no vote or group more important than anybody else's. To stray away from that principle is to go down an extremely dangerous path. One which essentially compromises democracy and would cause deep resentment among some, and an artificial feeling of self importance among others. For those who were too young to vote in 2016, well hard luck. Again, a referendum takes that snapshot view at a given point in time. How else can it be done? In conclusion, we were told that the result of the referendum would be honoured, and people voted in good faith based on that. If that result was not to your liking, then in democratic spirit you should bow to the majority will. To now see the current shambles in parliament caused by a bunch of mainly remainer MP's manifestly hell bent on stopping brexit, is appalling. Puffed up with their own arrogant self importance, they clearly are quite happy to "piss all over" the majority of voters in that 2016 referendum. Not my expression by the way. I heard it today at work in connection with the same topic, and thought it was quite apt

One point in their favour is that they did accept an offer from me once that was substantially below their asking price. It pays to haggle with them.