The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Experts are on average wrong, if the were right 60% of the time they would be very rich & would not need a day job being paid as an expert. A chimp throwing darts at the Financial Times beats most fund managers with a portfolio selection.

Altruism and excellence are truly lost on you, aren't they? And fund managers are little better than punters in your local bookies. Many of the same principles apply.

There are wonderful people in this world who strive and dedicate themselves to solve the problems of life. The team members of the Human Genome Research Project ignored the vast wads of cash being offered to them and published their findings free online for the benefit of all mankind. People like that have my unending admiration and respect, not money grabbing weasels. There are no pockets in shrouds.

	Quote:	Tom1234
	That's a pretty strong argument against direct democracy.

And what a toll it will take on democracy - because some did not like the outcome! So let's change the process and ignore the vote because the "ignorants" voted and had no clue.

This is very similar to the US situation. Trump should never had won; he did not deserve it. Ignorants/"deplorables" voted him into office so now we need to change the electoral college as that is unfair. Our candidate, Hillary did not win and something must be amiss with the process for her not to win.

So let's claim Russian interference or an electoral college issue. Let's not look at the obvious: Hillary was a flawed candidate at best and ran a poorly run campaign to give Trump a victory.

If you are going to contest a US vote and Brexit, by claiming the process was inherently flawed as "deplorables"/ignorants voted, something is amiss. And to change the process puts democracy at risk in my view.

[marton]

	Quote:	rainer_d
	It's only stupid if you have stupid, uneducated constituents. Governments all across the world and of all political colors have worked tirelessly in the last decades to keep their constituents as stupid and uneducated as they possibly can under the assumption that they can then be more easily manipulated (towards what the politicians want). It's a silly game and there are no winners in the end.

Half of all voters have under the average IQ; any voting system has to live with that.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	Troublawesome
	And as soon as they scrutinize it they'll realise it's an abomination and won't proceed.

It's a horrendous deal. Notably worse than May's deal.

I was freakin' livid this afternoon watching the PM. Every time an MP raised issues regarding future employment laws, he swerved them into laws regarding the transport of live animals across borders...probably to please his animal rights other half. He also misrepresented EU legislation surrounding maternity leave and failed to note that the EU sets the minimum requirements, leaving each member state to set their own laws with that as only the starting point. UK maternity and paternity leave is crap compared to Hungary and Greece, but you'll never hear him mention that.

I've always believed politics and local goverment should be a compulsory subject from age 11 upwards. Politics decides a huge amount of our daily lives, from deciding what time we get up in the morning to what we have for dinner in the evening. It's all rooted in politics and law. People need to grasp that and not shy away from it in the belief that it's 'too complicated for them' or 'boring'. It's about understanding the world around us just as much as a David Attenborough tv series, and he gets millions of viewers from right across the socio-economic spectrum.

	Quote:	fatmanfilms
	Experts are on average wrong, if the were right 60% of the time they would be very rich & would not need a day job being paid as an expert. A chimp throwing darts at the Financial Times beats most fund managers with a portfolio selection.

It may come as a massive surprise to someone as completely money driven as you that that doesn't apply to absolutely everyone else.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	marton
	Half of all voters have under the average IQ; any voting system has to live with that.

Educational IQ isn't everything. I've worked with some remarkable people who were incredibly emotionally intelligent, had amazing practical skills, or just a hefty dose of good old-fashioned common sense.

The Year is 2192. The British Prime Minister visits Brussel to ask for extension of the Brexit Deadline. no one remembers where this tradition originated, but every year it attracts tourists from all over the world.

(Not mine, but I laughed and wanted to share)

[rainer_d]

	Quote:	marton
	Half of all voters have under the average IQ; any voting system has to live with that.

Yes, but if you do nothing against that decline at some point you'll have to stop having meaningful votes at all.

I hear this in Germany all the time: "No, we can't really ask the voters on this issue because they're stupid and we don't like what they'll vote for. Also, it's very complicated and I can't explain it in detail right now. Trust us do the right thing, ok?"

And then, politicians act all <insert suprised-picachu-face pic> surprised when right-wing fringe-parties get enormous gains on election day because they promised voters to do what they (voters) wanted.

Eventually, the voter will always get what (s)he wants.

In Switzerland, at least politicians are still used to be challenged by voters and thus are much better at holding a discussion that non-academics can understand without resorting to kindergarden language.

[curley]

	Quote:	terrifisch
	And what a toll it will take on democracy - because some did not like the outcome! So let's change the process and ignore the vote because the "ignorants" voted and had no clue. This is very similar to the US situation. Trump should never had won; he did not deserve it. Ignorants/"deplorables" voted him into office so now we need to change the electoral college as that is unfair. Our candidate, Hillary did not win and something must be amiss with the process for her not to win. So let's claim Russian interference or an electoral college issue. Let's not look at the obvious: Hillary was a flawed candidate at best and ran a poorly run campaign to give Trump a victory. If you are going to contest a US vote and Brexit, by claiming the process was inherently flawed as "deplorables"/ignorants voted, something is amiss. And to change the process puts democracy at risk in my view.

I think you quoted the wrong person, I got the impression you are actually replying to this post here.

[k_and_e]

	Quote:	terrifisch
	And what a toll it will take on democracy - because some did not like the outcome! So let's change the process and ignore the vote because the "ignorants" voted and had no clue. This is very similar to the US situation. Trump should never had won; he did not deserve it. Ignorants/"deplorables" voted him into office so now we need to change the electoral college as that is unfair. Our candidate, Hillary did not win and something must be amiss with the process for her not to win. So let's claim Russian interference or an electoral college issue. Let's not look at the obvious: Hillary was a flawed candidate at best and ran a poorly run campaign to give Trump a victory. If you are going to contest a US vote and Brexit, by claiming the process was inherently flawed as "deplorables"/ignorants voted, something is amiss. And to change the process puts democracy at risk in my view.

Good post. The basic idea of democracy is indeed to give power to the powerless.

	Quote:	curley
	I think you quoted the wrong person, I got the impression you are actually replying to this post here.

Thanks Curley. But I don't buy the whole people are morons argument...hence why I chose not to quote Toubleawesome's post. I believe in Democracy and many times those in power have zero clue about the grievances re: masses/ignorants and God love Hillary Clinton's quote "deplorables"!

In short, the government's message is: We know better than you - because you cannot think for yourself. And frankly, I find that offensive - and not in line with democracy nor in line - at least in the US - with the constitution.

[marton]

	Quote:	terrifisch
	And what a toll it will take on democracy - because some did not like the outcome! So let's change the process and ignore the vote because the "ignorants" voted and had no clue. This is very similar to the US situation. Trump should never had won; he did not deserve it. Ignorants/"deplorables" voted him into office so now we need to change the electoral college as that is unfair. Our candidate, Hillary did not win and something must be amiss with the process for her not to win. So let's claim Russian interference or an electoral college issue. Let's not look at the obvious: Hillary was a flawed candidate at best and ran a poorly run campaign to give Trump a victory. If you are going to contest a US vote and Brexit, by claiming the process was inherently flawed as "deplorables"/ignorants voted, something is amiss. And to change the process puts democracy at risk in my view.

Obviously Hillary did not win the election but with almost 3 million votes more than Trump in the popular vote plus there is the fact that except for Obama in 2008 she got more popular votes than any other Presidential candidate ever. You have no grounds to claim Hillary was a flawed candidate at best and ran a poorly run campaign.

[marton]

	Quote:	Blueangel
	Educational IQ isn't everything. I've worked with some remarkable people who were incredibly emotionally intelligent, had amazing practical skills, or just a hefty dose of good old-fashioned common sense.

What is "Educational IQ", I have not heard that term before? I agree there are many other skills.

Problem is many political topics are complex so being of high intelligence helps to understand them. The temptation for politicians is too dumb down complex topics to reach a wider audience and then there is a further temptation to add bias to increase popularity.

Like, for example, Trump's claim that a physical Democratic national party server is hidden in Ukraine.

	Quote:	marton
	What is "Educational IQ", I have not heard that term before? I agree there are many other skills. Problem is many political topics are complex so being of high intelligence helps to understand them. The temptation for politicians is too dumb down complex topics to reach a wider audience and then there is a further temptation to add bias to increase popularity. Like, for example, Trump's claim that a physical Democratic national party server is hidden in Ukraine.

Wow! You have never heard of EQ Marton? That term has been around for at least 10 years...

Here is a primer for books related to EQ:

https://positivepsychology.com/best-...ligence-books/

	Quote:	terrifisch
	Wow! You have never heard of EQ Marton? That term has been around for at least 10 years... Here is a primer for books related to EQ: https://positivepsychology.com/best-...ligence-books/

EQ = Emotional Quotient and is something from the end of previous century.

Educational IQ is something that was invented Yesterday

	Quote:	terrifisch
	Wow! You have never heard of EQ Marton? That term has been around for at least 10 years... Here is a primer for books related to EQ: https://positivepsychology.com/best-...ligence-books/

I'm pretty certain that marton knows exactly what EQ is. And it ain't "Educational Intelligence".

Then again, marton reads very well.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	marton
	What is "Educational IQ", I have not heard that term before? I agree there are many other skills.

Perhaps I should have phrased it as academic intelligence or achievement?

Sorry in advance for waffling...
I'm that sad cow who does IQ tests for fun (pitted against my brother), but I don't have the academic qualifications to back it up and he does. I wipe the floor with him every time (in 4 Mensa tests over the years) which really pisses him off Then there's my ex-husband who didn't have an exam to his name but had a voracious appetite for reading. I taught him to play chess. After a year, I bought him a computerised chess set because I was sick of losing to him. I don't believe intelligence has a true measure, and is/or is a true measure of understanding and interpreting facts.

	Quote:	marton
	Problem is many political topics are complex so being of high intelligence helps to understand them. The temptation for politicians is too dumb down complex topics to reach a wider audience and then there is a further temptation to add bias to increase popularity.

The UK has long had a Crystal Mark English campaign, and a small part of my role as a union rep was to write info in this format to be read and understood by 835 employees, so that's everyone from canteen and hygiene staff right up to senior management. http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/servic...stal-mark.html
It's relatively easy to break many complex subjects down into more understandable language which can easily be consumed by the masses, but doing so effectively is a gift, which is why we have teachers. Some people can only be reached on an emotional level (estimated to be 1/3 of the electorate) which Dominic Cummings recognised and used to great effect in the referendum campaign. All the talk of 'fear' and now, 'surrender' and 'betrayal', is emotional language specifically designed to tap into that 1/3 of the electorate.

I read somewhere recently, that... 'Nobody is as happy as they seem on Facebook, as angry as they seem on Twitter, or as successful as they seem on LinkedIn'. Personally, I think there's a hell of a lot of truth in this, and for that reason, I think there's a case for banning all political adverts from Facebook alone because it has a distinctly different dynamic.

One of the great advantages of social media is that some exceptionally gifted people are giving their time freely to explain highly complex constructs of law, such as this wonderful man... https://twitter.com/davidallengreen I didn't have the foggiest idea what 'Padfield' is in constitutional law a couple of years ago, but I have a rudimentary understanding of it now thanks to him.

The problem (as I see it) with politics is, too many politicians aren't all that bright and some who are, lack emotional intelligence, foresight or vision. There are two in particular who are being touted as future party leaders, but I really don't see what they have to offer because there are people on this forum who could run rings around them.

[Sky]

Blueangel, I wish I could green rep you more.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	terrifisch
	... re: masses/ignorants and God love Hillary Clinton's quote "deplorables"! In short, the government's message is: We know better than you - because you cannot think for yourself.

When the initial comment was made, I agreed that it was a mistake, but always took it as refering to people who were dishonourable or disreputable. It was the Republicans and media who morphed it into an attack on intelligence. The fact that so many people picked up on that and ran with it only served to show that
a) they were being manipulated because they took it personally - emotional response
and/or
b) they didn't understand the meaning of the word 'deplorable' and had no access to a dictionary despite being online. - that's a pretty self explanatory response.

The exact same tactic was used in the UK during the referendum, and don't be fooled, it's a long used political tactic in debates. It's like any argument you might have with family, friends or neighbours. Never bring someone's children or mother into an argument. That's the boundary.