Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
How Brexit has Stolen Britain's Future
Topic Started: Jun 28 2016, 05:02 AM (719 Views)
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Climate Change references edited out to limit the damage to our Right Wingers' Internal Circuitry
Skeptical Science
 
The inter-generational theft of Brexit

In last week’s Brexit vote results, there was a tremendous divide between age groups. 73% of voters under the age of 25 voted to remain in the EU, while about 58% over the age of 45 voted to leave.

Posted Image

Inter-generational theft

The problem is of course that younger generations will have to live with the consequences of the decisions we make today for much longer than older generations. Older generations in developed countries prospered as a result of profligate overuse of Natural Resources.

However, we’ve already reached the point where even contrarian economists agree, any further overuse will be detrimental for the global economy. For poorer countries, we passed that point decades ago.

For much of the time during which developed nations experienced strong economic growth, we were unaware of the associated damage. We can no longer use ignorance as an excuse. And yet the older generations, who experienced the greatest net benefit pollution, are now the least supportive of taking responsibility for it.

Similarly, today’s youth who are early in their career paths will face the harshest consequences of the Brexit vote that was dominated by older voters. As Jack Lennard put it:
Quote:
 
This is a final middle-fingered salute to the young from the baby boomer generation. Not content with racking up insurmountable debt, not content with destroying any hopes of sustainable property prices or stable career paths, not content with enjoying the benefits of free education and generous pension schemes before burning down the ladder they climbed up, the baby boomers have given one last turd on the doorstep of the younger generation.

And as political journalist Nicholas Barrett said in a comment that subsequently went viral:
Quote:
 
The younger generation has lost the right to live and work in 27 other countries. We will never know the full extent of the lost opportunities, friendships, marriages and experiences we will be denied. Freedom of movement was taken away by our parents, uncles, and grandparents in a parting blow to a generation that was already drowning in the debts of our predecessors.

Thirdly and perhaps most significantly, we now live in a post-factual democracy.

A dangerous strain of anti-intellectualism

As Barrett noted, during the Brexit campaign, facts seemed useless against the myths propagated by the Leave side. Indeed, Nigel Farage, leader of the right-wing UK Independence Party and Leave campaign has already admitted the key claim that £350 million weekly saving in EU contributions could be spent on health services was utter nonsense – a “mistake,” as he put it. A “mistake” that was conveniently admitted just hours after Brexit votes had been cast and counted.

When asked to name a single economist who backed Brexit, justice secretary and another top Leave campaigner Michael Gove said “people in this country have had enough of experts” and later likened those experts to Nazis.

Ultimately it boils down to ideological biases. When the facts and expert conclusions contradict our beliefs, people will often find an excuse to dismiss the evidence and experts. It’s perhaps unsurprising that Gove and many other Leave campaign backers are also climate contrarians.
Link

(I had to leave that last Climate reference in, as it does tell a story - sorry about that...)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sea Dog
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Does anyone think that the US right will pay attention
to the chaos wrought in Britain?
I suppose not!

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/06/26/scottish-leader-may-try-to-block-brexit-as-turmoil-spreads_n_10684978.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D-1850537704
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Oh, they will pay attention Sea - as a matter of fact, they are doing so already...

And I think you're about to discover it's all Obama's fault!
Edited by Brewster, Jun 28 2016, 05:45 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
LOL
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Thank you Neutral, for a well thought out and insightful discussion of the issues of the day.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Your lies and whining deserve nothing more Brew.
Reading another thread I was just thinking you are not quite as bad as Sea though.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Banandangees
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]

The conservative, Right, PM of Britain, who was against leaving the EU, said today that there will be no Rebrexit, that the people of Britain have spoken in a fair democratic election, that he will honor their decision. Why can't this forum's "progressive" Canadians live with it, instead of projecting their distant disagreement and frustration onto others? It's not their country. Why do they feel that they know what's best for the Brits. Perhaps, since these Canadians feel so strongly about the EU, and against half of U.S. voters, Canada should consider joining the EU for their own benefit and security?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pat
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
In my opinion, polls are too flawed to depend upon. there are so many ways that people communicate these days, it is impossible to give a broad enough cross section of the population being polled. Here is an example of this problem. Which in my opinion, leaves us with an OP that might or might not be close to the truth.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/05/lord-ashcrofts-polling-overlooked-many-of-the-real-election-battlegrounds/

Lord Ashcroft’s polling overlooked many of the real election battlegrounds
Robert Smith

Lord Ashcroft has likened the current state of the polling industry with that of the Liberal Democrats, but he could quite have easily chosen the Labour party as a comparison. All are in the post-mortem stage: pondering how they got the election so wrong and desperately searching for the path back to public credibility.

More than ten companies provided regular national polls during the campaign, but it was Lord Ashcroft who offered the most detail on specific marginal seats. The reputation of the once-reviled peer had been reinvigorated through a £3 million operation that surveyed an impressive 167 constituencies. His freely available research seemed to give more detail than ever before on how an election would turn out in the places that mattered.

But looking over the database now shows how misplaced that confidence was. Ashcroft polled 167 constituencies and had the eventual winner ahead in only 103 of cases – a success rate of 62 per cent. For the polls that were published after the short campaign began on 30 March, the success rate was still only 63 per cent. The largest gaps between poll and result were not confined to any type of seat in particular. Let’s take some examples:

Cannock Chase: On 27 April, Ashcroft had Labour six percentage points ahead. Result: Tories won by 10.5 points.

Castle Point: On 27 April, Ashcroft had the Conservatives five points ahead of Ukip. Result: Tories won by 19.7 points.

Cornwall North: On 1 May, Ashcroft had the Liberal Democrats two points ahead. Result: Tories won by 13.7 points.

Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale: On 1 May, Ashcroft had the SNP 11 points ahead. Result: Tories won by 1.5 points.

Harrow East: On 8 April, Ashcroft had Labour four points ahead. Result: Tories won by 9.7 points.

Morecambe and Lunesdale: On 8 April, Ashcroft had Labour six points ahead. Result: Tories won by 10.6 points.

You have to ask whether Ashcroft’s ‘targets seats’ strategy was always doomed to fight the battles of the last campaign. Many of the real battlegrounds (like Gower, now Britain’s most marginal seat) were not polled once. Of the 72 seats now with majorities of fewer than 3,000 votes, 25 were not polled at all. Of those that were surveyed, the final Ashcroft poll had the eventual winner ahead in only 36 per cent of cases. That only 14 of these were conducted this year shows how Ashcroft’s operation did not focus on the seats on which the Tories built their majority.

Lord Ashcroft was not alone in getting the numbers wrong, of course – Andrew Cooper, David Cameron’s former director of strategy, gave the Tories just a 0.5 per cent chance of forming a majority – and he has always described his constituency polls as ‘snapshots’ rather than ‘predictions’. This is a fair acknowledgement that voters can change their minds and no poll can know for sure how they will act once in a polling booth. A healthy dose of scepticism will be required at the next election, especially if similar polls are conducted with sample sizes of only a thousand people. Nonetheless, it is reasonable to think such snapshots should have been more prescient.

The polls were flawed, but they were not trivial. Fewer soft Ukip or Liberal Democrat supporters would have backed the Conservatives had the prospect of a Labour-SNP deal not been on the table. Lord Ashcroft intended to be entirely objective, but the unintentional inaccuracies of his constituency polls no doubt benefitted the Tories.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sea Dog
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Banandangees
Jun 28 2016, 06:36 AM
The conservative, Right, PM of Britain, who was against leaving the EU, said today that there will be no Rebrexit, that the people of Britain have spoken in a fair democratic election, that he will honor their decision. Why can't this forum's "progressive" Canadians live with it, instead of projecting their distant disagreement and frustration onto others? It's not their country. Why do they feel that they know what's best for the Brits. Perhaps, since these Canadians feel so strongly about the EU, and against half of U.S. voters, Canada should consider joining the EU for their own benefit and security?
The Brits were sucked in by right wing fear mongering.
The same thing could well happen in your country.

When the sun rose and the people of Britain realized
that they had screwed up, of course they wanted a do-over.

You are apparently too unaware to realize
that the world markets and financiers are reeling from shock.
No sane person expected the result of the vote!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Sea just called a lot of people stupid. Ironic isn't it? lol
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis