3 ms·

I don't know enough about Brexit to form an opinion, which is good. It enables to to seriously ask this question. Have you actually considered that your opinio

by KGIII 9y ago

I don't know enough about Brexit to form an opinion, which is good. It enables to to seriously ask this question. Have you actually considered that your opinion on Brexit could be wrong? Have you really given that any consideration? I don't have a nickel invested, so your answer doesn't matter to me. It may matter to you, however.

Clubber 9y ago
Agree. Unlike how most news outlets portray it, most issues have valid points on both sides. If someone doesn't understand both sides and can argue either, they don't really understand the problem. If they don't understand the problem and defer to news coverage, and are being manipulated. Based on most of the coverage of Brexit, I wouldn't have any idea what the pro-Brexit points are. I also don't have a horse in that race, just observations.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  I'm not sure if I could argue the leave side fully, but here are the two points they have I believe are very much important: - Many people do like sovereignty of their state, and fear EU is evolving towards weakening, and eventually subsuming nation states. Discussion of the merits of both the position and the fear is a complex thing that needs to go into details, and a one which media failed to do properly. - Many people also dislike the immigration situation within the EU. Again, this is also a very complex topic. Neither of those points, I believe, can be dismissed out of hand, which is often what happens in discussion about Brexit. (Disclaimer: I have no direct horse in this race, but I am a citizen of the EU and kind of like it to stay, so I lean towards the stay side.)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- KekDemaga 9y ago
  I have found that people, despite protestations to the contrary virtually always argue for policy that they believe would benefit them personally in some way. I came to this realization after reading and watching fairly extensively the arguments against income inequality. I personally feel that lack of opportunity is a waste of human resources as surely countless great people who would have shaped society for the better have died without leaving that impact due to lack of access to capitol. Now 80% of the world lives on less than $10 a day, in my view these are the true victims of income inequity yet as I watched debate after debate these people were never mentioned. In fact the people debating seemed to believe that relatively wealthy, often educated Americans would be the beneficiaries of a more "fair" (fairness is debatable and outside of the scope of what I'm saying here) income distribution. That isn't the case as per capita incomes if all global GDP were distributed equally would be around ten thousand dollars per person before taxes, much less than the vast majority of Americans receive as cash income not counting government programs (remember all governmental services must be paid out of that ten thousand. Roads, police, healthcare, food stamps, etc). Thus income inequality isn't the problem they are attempting to resolve instead they are attempting to resolve it in a very limited arbitrary scope that happens to improve their own personal fortunes while ignoring most of the world that is suffering to a greater extent than they will ever experience. This is not to say a particular group is bad, just that their ideas no matter how cleverly disguised are at their core about promoting self interest just like everyone else. I expect the people who voted leave had similar intentions as did the remain voters, naked self interest.

by KGIII 9y ago

Clubber 9y ago

Agree. Unlike how most news outlets portray it, most issues have valid points on both sides. If someone doesn't understand both sides and can argue either, they don't really understand the problem. If they don't understand the problem and defer to news coverage, and are being manipulated. Based on most of the coverage of Brexit, I wouldn't have any idea what the pro-Brexit points are. I also don't have a horse in that race, just observations.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
I'm not sure if I could argue the leave side fully, but here are the two points they have I believe are very much important: - Many people do like sovereignty of their state, and fear EU is evolving towards weakening, and eventually subsuming nation states. Discussion of the merits of both the position and the fear is a complex thing that needs to go into details, and a one which media failed to do properly. - Many people also dislike the immigration situation within the EU. Again, this is also a very complex topic. Neither of those points, I believe, can be dismissed out of hand, which is often what happens in discussion about Brexit. (Disclaimer: I have no direct horse in this race, but I am a citizen of the EU and kind of like it to stay, so I lean towards the stay side.)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
KekDemaga 9y ago
I have found that people, despite protestations to the contrary virtually always argue for policy that they believe would benefit them personally in some way. I came to this realization after reading and watching fairly extensively the arguments against income inequality. I personally feel that lack of opportunity is a waste of human resources as surely countless great people who would have shaped society for the better have died without leaving that impact due to lack of access to capitol. Now 80% of the world lives on less than $10 a day, in my view these are the true victims of income inequity yet as I watched debate after debate these people were never mentioned. In fact the people debating seemed to believe that relatively wealthy, often educated Americans would be the beneficiaries of a more "fair" (fairness is debatable and outside of the scope of what I'm saying here) income distribution. That isn't the case as per capita incomes if all global GDP were distributed equally would be around ten thousand dollars per person before taxes, much less than the vast majority of Americans receive as cash income not counting government programs (remember all governmental services must be paid out of that ten thousand. Roads, police, healthcare, food stamps, etc). Thus income inequality isn't the problem they are attempting to resolve instead they are attempting to resolve it in a very limited arbitrary scope that happens to improve their own personal fortunes while ignoring most of the world that is suffering to a greater extent than they will ever experience. This is not to say a particular group is bad, just that their ideas no matter how cleverly disguised are at their core about promoting self interest just like everyone else. I expect the people who voted leave had similar intentions as did the remain voters, naked self interest.