PDA

View Full Version : Brexit: not inevitable



Maciamo
25-06-16, 11:59
The EU referendum in the UK, which resulted in a vote in favour of the Brexit, sent a shockwave across the business and political world. The market reacted by wiping $2 trillion worth of assets after Moody's downgraded the UK's rating, and the GBP fell at its lowest level against the USD in 30 years. All media are talking about it as a catastrophe, and some EU leaders (Juncker, Schulz) are already requesting that the UK for submit its exit plan as soon as possible. During that time the Scots are planning a new referendum for their independence from the UK so that they can remain in the EU.

But why such extreme reaction on all parts? Are none of these politicians and economists aware that the referendum is not legally binding? In other words, David Cameron has the right to ignore the results of the referendum. Why wouldn't he since he has already decided to resign in October anyway. He's got nothing more to lose, and that is the only rational way of saving the country from actual disaster. There is no reason to listen to a bunch of lower-class nincompoops who had no idea what they were really voting for. The vast majority of educated Britons and of the top business people and politicians in the EU and the USA are strongly against Brexit, because it really will damage the UK and EU economy and reduce people's freedom of movement and political rights.

David Cameron could easily circumvent the decision of leaving the EU by asking parliament to vote on the issue. And since a majority of British MPs do not support Brexit, they will reject the referendum's results and that's the end of it. If British politicians had any common sense that is what they would do.

As usual The Economist summarises (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21701265-how-minimise-damage-britains-senseless-self-inflicted-blow-tragic-split?force=scn/tw/te/pe/ed/atragicsplit) the situation brilliantly:


The vote to Leave amounts to an outpouring of fury against the “establishment” (http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21701266-englands-vote-brexit-exposes-anarchic-streak-otherwise-pragmatic-people). Everyone from Barack Obama to the heads of NATO and the IMF urged Britons to embrace the EU. Their entreaties were spurned by voters who rejected not just their arguments but the value of “experts” in general.

One of the drawbacks of democracy is that the uneducated masses usually have no idea of what is good for them as they do not understand how the economy works. The reality of Brexit would mean that many companies in the UK would relocated elsewhere in the EU or fire a large number of people. Personal taxes would have to increase to replace the lost corporate taxes. The lower pound would result in an increase of prices for most imported products, including food and clothes, and in more expensive holidays abroad. The lower and middle classes, those who voted in favour of Brexit, would be the hardest hit as they have the smallest disposable income and are the first to be laid off in case of recession. Some analysts warned that voting Brexit would equate to shooting oneself in the foot. But for ordinary people who do not have savings or investments in a variety of foreign currencies, and that is much worse than that. Brexit could push middle-class people into poverty.

One of the stupidest reason to vote for Brexit was the mistaken belief that it would limit undesirable immigration (e.g. of Syrian refugees) and lower the risk of terrorism. Haven't they noticed that the UK is not in the Schengen Area and that passport checks are already in place between the UK and the rest of the EU? And as Britain is an island, illegal immigrants cannot easily flock into the country anyway, unless anywhere in continental Europe (mind you, some Syrians even walked through Russia to get to Scandinavia). If anything, Brexit could push Britain to join Schengen, as Norway and Switzerland did, in order to keep freedom of movement with the EU, thus removing all of today's border controls. Anti-terrorism also works better when the police and secret services of different countries can work closely together, and that would work more efficiently within the EU.

I think that the main purpose of the referendum (from the political elite's point of view) was to have the opportunity to explain to the masses how overwhelmingly positive it is for the UK to remain in the EU (and for investors to profit from market volatility, but that's the cynical side of it). Unfortunately dimwits are and will always be dimwits. I know from experience that some people are incapable of understanding rational arguments presented to them, even when they are explained as plainly as possible and repeated again and again. I am convinced from having personally tried for years to instill knowledge and reason into less educated people that some people are too stupid for their own good. That 52% of Britons voted for Brexit just confirms one more time that most people have no idea of how the world works.

I suppose that all the media reaction we are witnessing now is just another show to scare the wannabe Brexiters into regretting their action by warning of the consequences. I expect that either the referendum's results will be rejected by the political class, or that a second referendum will be held.

bicicleur
25-06-16, 21:01
If the British government ignores the referendum, this Brexit theme will keep on coming back on the agenda.
I don't think this would be a good idea.
We need clarity asap.
We can't wait till october.

LeBrok
25-06-16, 21:03
Interesting scenario. Technically possible, though I doubt if any political party, currently ruling one including, would have guts to pull it off. Could be a political suicide and riots on streets.

Angela
25-06-16, 22:43
From his point of view and in terms of the consequences for him I think Cameron made a huge blunder in calling for the referendum, but I don't think there's any way that a British politician could ignore it.

He was a class act in defeat, however.

Trump was the opposite of a class act. It may indeed be that we're seeing a sort of populist uprising with both the Brexit vote and Trump's rise, but he's suffering in U.S. polls because he's too much of a clown. He's also offended too many women, and deeply alienated a lot of Hispanics by some of his more extreme opinions. He could have gotten some of them, but they couldn't stomach the idea that their grandparents in some cases, here for decades, would be rounded up and deported. He just doesn't know when to shut up. George Bush had Laura to rein him in and tell him to cut down on the cowboy rhetoric, but Trump just has a mute Barbie doll.

LeBrok
26-06-16, 00:07
http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by The Economist
The vote to Leave amounts to an outpouring of fury against the “establishment” (http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21701266-englands-vote-brexit-exposes-anarchic-streak-otherwise-pragmatic-people). Everyone from Barack Obama to the heads of NATO and the IMF urged Britons to embrace the EU. Their entreaties were spurned by voters who rejected not just their arguments but the value of “experts” in general. But isn't it truth that they have listened to the politicians/establishment who claimed there will not be long lasting consequences of Brexit?
I think these "natural conservatives" listened only to anyone who confirmed their point of view, including many politicians/establishment and some economists. It is more of a typical behaviour of human being. We tend to agree with anyone who confirms our point of view, and consider it as truth.
It is more about people being uncertain and scared in today's geopolitical climate, and these emotions always bring "natural conservative" in us and we drift into isolationism. Build walls and hide.


I'm not saying that there are no issues with EU and economic and political establishment screwing few things up. They do screwed up a lot, but not more or less than in previous decades. So, I just don't think it explains the whole going extreme right or extreme left and growing isolationism and nationalism (we/they) trends in Europe and America.

nordicwarrior
26-06-16, 01:06
Maciamo... Why do those on your side blame the dumb masses at every turn, while ignoring the elephant in the room? Radical Islam is driving this response. Frankly these voters are behaving in a rational manner--what trumps self-preservation?

oriental
26-06-16, 01:49
Haven't seen you for quite a while.

Britain will come out all right. It will probably form some sort of relationship with the Scandinavians especially Denmark and Norway and also have closer ties with Canada, Ozzieland and New Zealand. Of course there is the USA and the Commonwealth. Britain is unique and different from other European countries as it has so many ties.

Sile
26-06-16, 03:51
For all those who don't believe in a democratic vote from people, these people live in the wrong century........you mind is fixed on a feudal system.

Just realise that globalization, destroyed the middle-class and the vote was the reaction of the middle-class PLUS the lower class who once could achieve to get to the middle-class, but cannot due to the stupid system that has been adopted from the introduction of globalization.

England/Britain will be far better off out of Europe ...................they can ignore crazy Merkel now

Aaron1981
26-06-16, 04:59
The EU referendum in the UK, which resulted in a vote in favour of the Brexit, sent a shockwave across the business and political world. The market reacted by wiping $2 trillion worth of assets after Moody's downgraded the UK's rating, and the GBP fell at its lowest level against the USD in 30 years. All media are talking about it as a catastrophe, and some EU leaders (Juncker, Schulz) are already requesting that the UK for submit its exit plan as soon as possible. During that time the Scots are planning a new referendum for their independence from the UK so that they can remain in the EU.

But why such extreme reaction on all parts? Are none of these politicians and economists aware that the referendum is not legally binding? In other words, David Cameron has the right to ignore the results of the referendum. Why wouldn't he since he has already decided to resign in October anyway. He's got nothing more to lose, and that is the only rational way of saving the country from actual disaster. There is no reason to listen to a bunch of lower-class nincompoops who had no idea what they were really voting for. The vast majority of educated Britons and of the top business people and politicians in the EU and the USA are strongly against Brexit, because it really will damage the UK and EU economy and reduce people's freedom of movement and political rights.

David Cameron could easily circumvent the decision of leaving the EU by asking parliament to vote on the issue. And since a majority of British MPs do not support Brexit, they will reject the referendum's results and that's the end of it. If British politicians had any common sense that is what they would do.

As usual The Economist summarises (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21701265-how-minimise-damage-britains-senseless-self-inflicted-blow-tragic-split?force=scn/tw/te/pe/ed/atragicsplit) the situation brilliantly:



One of the drawbacks of democracy is that the uneducated masses usually have no idea of what is good for them as they do not understand how the economy works. The reality of Brexit would mean that many companies in the UK would relocated elsewhere in the EU or fire a large number of people. Personal taxes would have to increase to replace the lost corporate taxes. The lower pound would result in an increase of prices for most imported products, including food and clothes, and in more expensive holidays abroad. The lower and middle classes, those who voted in favour of Brexit, would be the hardest hit as they have the smallest disposable income and are the first to be laid off in case of recession. Some analysts warned that voting Brexit would equate to shooting oneself in the foot. But for ordinary people who do not have savings or investments in a variety of foreign currencies, and that is much worse than that. Brexit could push middle-class people into poverty.

One of the stupidest reason to vote for Brexit was the mistaken belief that it would limit undesirable immigration (e.g. of Syrian refugees) and lower the risk of terrorism. Haven't they noticed that the UK is not in the Schengen Area and that passport checks are already in place between the UK and the rest of the EU? And as Britain is an island, illegal immigrants cannot easily flock into the country anyway, unless anywhere in continental Europe (mind you, some Syrians even walked through Russia to get to Scandinavia). If anything, Brexit could push Britain to join Schengen, as Norway and Switzerland did, in order to keep freedom of movement with the EU, thus removing all of today's border controls. Anti-terrorism also works better when the police and secret services of different countries can work closely together, and that would work more efficiently within the EU.

I think that the main purpose of the referendum (from the political elite's point of view) was to have the opportunity to explain to the masses how overwhelmingly positive it is for the UK to remain in the EU (and for investors to profit from market volatility, but that's the cynical side of it). Unfortunately dimwits are and will always be dimwits. I know from experience that some people are incapable of understanding rational arguments presented to them, even when they are explained as plainly as possible and repeated again and again. I am convinced from having personally tried for years to instill knowledge and reason into less educated people that some people are too stupid for their own good. That 52% of Britons voted for Brexit just confirms one more time that most people have no idea of how the world works.

I suppose that all the media reaction we are witnessing now is just another show to scare the wannabe Brexiters into regretting their action by warning of the consequences. I expect that either the referendum's results will be rejected by the political class, or that a second referendum will be held.

You're calling 52% of their population nincompoops? My only concern is that "Brexit" won't achieve the goals which the NATIVE/INDIGENOUS population of Britain sought to achieve. My fingers are crossed.

Aren't Norway and Switzerland doing just fine?

Maciamo
26-06-16, 08:56
Interesting scenario. Technically possible, though I doubt if any political party, currently ruling one including, would have guts to pull it off. Could be a political suicide and riots on streets.

I very much doubt so. In the last two days Remain voters have managed to gather 2.5 million signatures and counting for a petition to hold a new referendum, hoping to overturn this one. There was already half a million signatures a few hours after the results were announced. At present half of the country is fuming and angry at Leave voters. Since the vast majority of young, motivated and energetic people are among those most angry at Brexit, it would be unwise not to listen to them. There are far more chances of having riots (+ a collapsed economy as I explained above) if the government decides to carry on with Brexit than if they try to defuse it by ignoring the 52% (mostly working class and elderly) for everyone's sake.

Maciamo
26-06-16, 09:05
From his point of view and in terms of the consequences for him I think Cameron made a huge blunder in calling for the referendum, but I don't think there's any way that a British politician could ignore it.

I don't write much about politics, but in one of my few posts on British politics I had warned six years ago (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25753-Should-we-be-afraid-of-the-Tories-winning-the-elections-in-May/) that electing David Cameron as Prime Minister might be disastrous and lead to the UK leaving the EU or hurting its relationship with the EU. Here is what I wrote in April 2010:


The way I see it is that David Cameron, if elected, might do a lot of damage, not to the EU but to Britain itself. Further opt-outs will end up penalising the UK without much effect on other members. His isolationist policies will give a bad image to Britain and possibly ostracise the British politically and economically. All the Tories will achieve is missing opportunities to influence the future of Europe. The pound might well fall further, which would render imports, so important for British consumers, exceptionally expensive, with direct effect to augment the cost of life and make Britons poorer.

It's exactly what happened, but in even worse, as it's not just led to opt-outs but the possibility of complete withdrawals from the EU.

Ironically in the meantime Mr Cameron changed his tune and led a strongly pro-EU campaign for the last few months. But he was elected on the promise to hold the referendum and since he miscalculated his ability to convince the electorate that EU membership is far better than the alternative, it did end up in a disaster.

Maleth
26-06-16, 09:25
(Its a little confusing having the same title on two threads. Can they be merged?)


David Cameron could easily circumvent the decision of leaving the EU by asking parliament to vote on the issue. And since a majority of British MPs do not support Brexit, they will reject the referendum's results and that's the end of it. If British politicians had any common sense that is what they would do.

In this case this is not possible and it will ridicule the democratic process. The referendum has been called for by the EU skeptics for a while and they are a strong and aggressive voice. There has been a long and heated debate prior to the referendum. The question was very clear. In or Out. so no one can really question the outcome of it. If you ask me this should have happened before. The Irony is that if the referendum was held say 10 years ago I have no doubt the leave campaign would not just have a 2% lead but much more. The results of the Younger age group says it all.

Maciamo
26-06-16, 09:42
Maciamo... Why do those on your side blame the dumb masses at every turn, while ignoring the elephant in the room? Radical Islam is driving this response. Frankly these voters are behaving in a rational manner--what trumps self-preservation?

I can see that you have not followed the Leave vs Remain campaign closely in the last few months as I have. The Leave campaigners argued that EU citizens living in the UK costs the NHS (Britain's fully-subsidised healthcare system) billions of pounds, when in fact EU citizens in the UK contribute vastly more to the British economy than they cost it (UK gains £20 billion from European migrants according to a UCL economist) (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/05/eu-migrants-uk-gains-20bn-ucl-study). For this reason the Leave campaign is seen mostly as deceitful (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/25/boris-johnson-michael-gove-eu-liars) and xenophobic (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/25/the-uncomfortable-question-was-the-brexit-vote-based-on-racism/) and has only been supported by Far Right parties in Europe, such as Marine Le Pen in France (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/24/european-far-right-hails-britains-brexit-vote-marine-le-pen).

The question of Syrian refugees is irrelevant to the UK for three reasons:

1) Britain is an island and refugees can't just walk there by ignoring political borders, as they did elsewhere in Europe.

2) The UK is not in the EU's visa-free, border-free zone (Schengen Area), so leaving the EU won't change anything in that regard. In fact leaving the EU would surely prompt the UK to join Schengen like Norway and Switzerland and therefore allowing any Muslim immigrants accepted in, say, France or Greece, to legally live in the UK too. In other words being in the EU but not in Schengen allows Britain to benefit economically from the EU without having to open its borders.

3) There are almost no Syrian refugees in Britain today. Only 5000 have been accepted, much less than Denmark (which is 12x less populous than Britain) or Belgium, and even remote Australia (3x less populous than the UK). In comparison Germany has already welcomed 600,000 refugees, i.e. over one thousand times more than the UK ! You can check statistics on the number of Syrian refugees by country here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War).

So clearly Brexit has nothing to do with Syrian or other refugees. On the other hand, Britain has the third largest Muslim communities in Europe, nearly 5 million of them, mostly Pakistani and Bangladeshi from the former British Raj. Yet Brexit is not going to change anything about that. There has never been any talk by any party to expel Muslim immigrants - only European people living and working in the UK ! In fact, even Priti Patel, the British minister for employment, who is of Indian descent (although Hindu, not Muslim) ardently supported the Leave campaign (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12160196/Priti-Patel-tells-Tory-MPs-she-plans-on-playing-a-leading-role-in-Brexit-campaign.html).

Maciamo
26-06-16, 10:03
The Irony is that if the referendum was held say 10 years ago I have no doubt the leave campaign would not just have a 2% lead but much more. The results of the Younger age group says it all.

You can't possibly know that. Young people are generally more open-minded, tolerant and cosmopolitan-minded than their elders. This was as true 10 years ago as it is today. What the Brexit vote has shown is a clear age gradient: the older people get, the more isolationist, bitter, resentful and xenophobic they tend to become, and the less the listen to rational arguments, preferring to vote with their guts and their feet instead. That describes the senescence of the human brain, not the fact that Britons born in the mid-20th century were less international-minded than young people today. In fact British people have been the most internationally minded and liberal people on Earth since the 18th century.

One probable reason why so many working class and retired people voted for Brexit is that they feel discontented with their lot and abandoned by their politicians. But this trend is happening all over the Western world, and is far worse in America or France than in Britain today. People just can trust or relate to their politicians anymore and feel that the wealth gap is widening and job prospect decreasing for the less educated or the less adaptable. So the Brexit vote was essentially a protest vote aimed at maiming the establishment and richer Londoners. Nigel Farage's UK Independence Party is Britain's equivalent to Europe's Far-Right parties, which have all been rising dramatically since the 2008 financial crisis.

Brexit was caused essentially by laid-off factory workers unhappy about their job being relocated to China, taxi drivers that can't cope with the rise of Uber, and an growing precariat forced to accept zero-hour contracts. But quitting the EU won't help solve the problem. In fact, the EU has been the principal force protecting workers from the excesses seen in American, and an England outside the EU will become increasingly like the USA, where half of the population now lives below or near the poverty line (http://www.salon.com/2013/05/30/half_of_americans_living_below_or_near_poverty_lin e_partner/).

Maciamo
26-06-16, 10:24
You're calling 52% of their population nincompoops? My only concern is that "Brexit" won't achieve the goals which the NATIVE/INDIGENOUS population of Britain sought to achieve. My fingers are crossed.

So when Priti Patel campaigns for Brexit, that's the native Britons trying to reclaim their country?



Aren't Norway and Switzerland doing just fine?

Both countries are special cases. Norway is rich thanks to petrol. It has as much petrol as the UK for 15x less inhabitants. Do the maths. Switzerland has enriched itself by protecting the money of Nazi leaders, African dictators, European and American tax evaders, and a whole lot of other morally dubious people. With banking secrecy coming to an end, Switzerland's future doesn't look bright.

Yet you will notice that both countries are part of the EU's Schengen Area, and Norway is also a full member of the European Economic Area (EEA). If Britain leaves the EU, many politicians and journalists have already made it clear that Britain (or most likely an isolated England) will have to seek a similar deal as Norway, but that could take up to a decade to negotiate and implement, leaving the England to deal with economic and political uncertainty until 2026, an age when the world will look nothing like what we know today (http://www.vitamodularis.org/articles/your_life_is_going_to_change_faster_than_ever_befo re.shtml) due to the exponential growth of new technologies. By that time, most cars will be autonomous, domestic robots will do all our chores, agricultural robots will replace the last human farmers, we will be eating lab-grown meat and have transplants from lab-grown organs, universities and high schools will have been replaced by free online courses, any text or conversation will be instantly and perfectly translated in practically any language, brain-computer interfaces will connect our mind directly to the Internet, everyone will have free 5G Internet anywhere, and half of the people will be unemployed.

That's a lot of changes. I don't know if adding more changes and uncertainty by negotiating a protracted Brexit during this tumultuous period will be beneficial for people who already feel left out by society and technology, people who are too old to adapt to the modern world or not educated/intelligent enough to embrace the fast pace of change. Brexit or not, the rich and the young will always find a way to adapt, even if that means moving abroad. Those who voted for Brexit will ironically be left with even less than they have now by pushing away people who are paying their healthcare, well-fare and pensions.

Maleth
26-06-16, 10:34
You can't possibly know that.

indeed as there never was one (referendum), but the strong anti and often aggressive EU sentiment in the British parliament was always alive and well maybe even stronger then it is today. The main aggressive campaigners actually came from people outside the two big parties or without much influence on them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2f8nYMCO2I

Maciamo
26-06-16, 10:48
indeed as there never was one (referendum), but the strong anti and often aggressive EU sentiment in the British parliament was always alive and well maybe even stronger then it is today. The main aggressive campaigners actually came from people outside the two big parties or without much influence on them

Exactly, the real force behind Brexit was Nigel Farage and his UK Independence Party. The Conservative Party was supposed to be the most Eurosceptic, and yet Cameron, Osborne and most other Torys suddenly became convinced Europhiles and did all they could to prevent Brexit. That's because they were always truly pro-EU and only said otherwise to get the votes away from UKIP.

Brennos
26-06-16, 11:21
So when Priti Patel campaigns for Brexit, that's the native Britons trying to reclaim their country?



Both countries are special cases. Norway is rich thanks to petrol. It has as much petrol as the UK for 15x less inhabitants. Do the maths. Switzerland has enriched itself by protecting the money of Nazi leaders, African dictators, European and American tax evaders, and a whole lot of other morally dubious people. With banking secrecy coming to an end, Switzerland's future doesn't look bright.

Yet you will notice that both countries are part of the EU's Schengen Area, and Norway is also a full member of the European Economic Area (EEA). If Britain leaves the EU, many politicians and journalists have already made it clear that Britain (or most likely an isolated England) will have to seek a similar deal as Norway, but that could take up to a decade to negotiate and implement, leaving the England to deal with economic and political uncertainty until 2026, an age when the world will look nothing like what we know today (http://www.vitamodularis.org/articles/your_life_is_going_to_change_faster_than_ever_befo re.shtml) due to the exponential growth of new technologies. By that time, most cars will be autonomous, domestic robots will do all our chores, agricultural robots will replace the last human farmers, we will be eating lab-grown meat and have transplants from lab-grown organs, universities and high schools will have been replaced by free online courses, any text or conversation will be instantly and perfectly translated in practically any language, brain-computer interfaces will connect our mind directly to the Internet, everyone will have free 5G Internet anywhere, and half of the people will be unemployed.

That's a lot of changes. I don't know if adding more changes and uncertainty by negotiating a protracted Brexit during this tumultuous period will be beneficial for people who already feel left out by society and technology, people who are too old to adapt to the modern world or not educated/intelligent enough to embrace the fast pace of change. Brexit or not, the rich and the young will always find a way to adapt, even if that means moving abroad. Those who voted for Brexit will ironically be left with even less than they have now by pushing away people who are paying their healthcare, well-fare and pensions.

The Swiss will do what they used to do from the XII century until few decades ago: mercenary.

bicicleur
26-06-16, 11:38
(Its a little confusing having the same title on two threads. Can they be merged?)



In this case this is not possible and it will ridicule the democratic process. The referendum has been called for by the EU skeptics for a while and they are a strong and aggressive voice. There has been a long and heated debate prior to the referendum. The question was very clear. In or Out. so no one can really question the outcome of it. If you ask me this should have happened before. The Irony is that if the referendum was held say 10 years ago I have no doubt the leave campaign would not just have a 2% lead but much more. The results of the Younger age group says it all.

not so, the referendum itself and outcome is the result of the growing Euroscepticism which was not so strong 10 years ago

Maleth
26-06-16, 12:01
not so, the referendum itself and outcome is the result of the growing Euroscepticism which was not so strong 10 years ago

With all respect I am not too sure if you really know what you are talking about, or maybe not too familiar with British (more English) psyche towards the EU in general? especially from the conservative party?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2f8nYMCO2I

arvistro
26-06-16, 12:15
Brits will be just fine = as f*cked up as every other country in this century.
Trade will find its ways. Finance will find its ways even better given that Brits will be able to apply more "business friendly" AML requirements and would not have to comply to 4th EU AML Directive that is coming up soon.
I foresee leave as rather cosmetic thing leaving Brits less regulated but "still there".

Yetos
26-06-16, 13:43
Why we frighten Greece Portugal Spain and now England
THAT OUTSIADE EU THERE IS NO SALVATION?

why outside the big parties like Eu NATO USA etc is surely hell and burn,

Norway Swiss etc are not in such coalitions yet they manage well

are we attacking British for their desicion?
come on

IT REMINDS ME THE OLD STORY THAT CHRISTIAN BISHOPS USED TO SAY,
'OUTSIDE THE CHURCH THERE IS ONLY DOOM AND HELL, NO SALVATION'
and frighten the peasants, Notice not the faith, but the church

did the reformationists burn in hell?
well Europe suffered from religious wars but nobody can say that there is no hope or salvation/survivor outside EU.

EU is not a fiscal Union yet,
it better all nations to decide before we enter that phase.

and EU is not the promise land, land of Kanaan,
EU must must recosinder her inner policies,
the economical cruck of Eu by entrance of ex iron curtain countries is now far behind,
these countries today have developed their skills and progress, and in future might go further,
so the inner policy must change,
we must define borders, better customs at borders, and secure laws,
EU MUST PROTECT ITS CITIZENS, NOT HER NOBLE CORPORATIONS,

as for England/Britain,
I expand at another post,
THEY MUST FINISH THAT QUICKLY,
MAX at 3-5 years,
IF ENGLAND WAS OUT OF EU LAWS TODAY 500 000 immigrants would force to leave and 300 000 English would find job easily,
although the longer the precedure England might loose 500 000 jobs until 2020 if the exit is a delay, long time promise.

as for the big market called EU,
well England only has to produce EU standards to be in (CE-Certificate European)
but can easily turn to the rest of the world if revives the old BS (British standarts)
as for the migrate of corporations etc etc, from London,
come on,
until 20th century 2 myths move the world naval merchants
London and Dutch
'Brittania rules the World' and 'Flying Dutchman'
but today no one can say that, cause the Hong Kong and China naval forces are ahead
modern Titanic or Bretanic her brother are not British, neither European,

and England secret industry is elsewhere today, medicine production,
if plays the game well, she can force many countries and Union to accept her rules,
THE SHOCK OF BREXIT IS AT BOTH, ENGLAND AND EU
BUT THE BIGGEST SHOCK IS AT MODERN GLOBALIST-BANKING SYSTEM,
SOMEONE DARE TO SAY NO TO GLOBALIZATION,
and back to national state,
and that is what hurts to the rich of the world,
the limit of space to expand their corporation and Banking empires,

the economical issues are easily broken, and are vulnerable at such a mess,
JUST LOOK
Nokia and Erickson,
the 2 fantastic corporations of EU (Finland and Sweden)
we all remember the first mobile devices of EU, and many play at stock exchange believing at these 2,
Today which mobile corporation produces phones at Europe?
Nokia is at India (microsoft) and Erickson become Sony.
WHAT DID EU to keep and develop these 2?
simply the easy mathematicks of profit, sell the patterns and know-how and today produces none, etc etc,
but the unemployed European citizen see his shelf without insurance, job, and that makes him lunatic,
much of mental illness in EU of today is due to unemployment.

to finish,
Both EU and England (Scots and N irish might ask for indepedence) will survive,
the ones who lost will be the rich guys and bankers,
the one who learned to live by hard work, and eating a glass of milk, a slice of bread, few olives, and 2 tomatoes from a small garden will survive,
TIME TO BRING EUROPE BACK TO THE VALLUES OF 50-60-70's
and time to decide all Europeans what Europe they want and for who.

PS
when I was young the conomy I first sited was
90% of TV and vacuum cleaners were from Deutschland
radios from Netherlands
most medicines from England
Italian Belgian German Yugoslavian cars
meat and razors and electic cables from France, (and Argentina)
later mobiles phones from Scandinavia,
and Fruits from Greece (etc Spanish for Spain, Italian for Italy)

Today as EU citizen i see
70% of Tv from Korea (1/10 of EU population) some made in Europe for Korean corporations. and the rest from Turkey
Medicines from India
Cars which parts are not European, only the name, BMW tottaly from Turkey, (Bayerische Motoren Werke!!!!)
meats from wherever with Dioxines, etc etc
mobiles from China and India,
and fruits from S America and Africa etc etc

that is the EU dreamed at 1950's? or at 1970's?
mental ill unemployment youth, drinking coca cola, listening to crup, consuming drugs,
and work at brothels? in the name of temporay numerical profit?
while non EU corporations are getting richer and richer?
THE DREAM WAS A NON WAR EUROPE, AND A HUGE MARKET FOR ALL EU CORPORATIONS,
NOT FOR ME A SOUTHERN TO EAT ORANGES FROM BRAZIL DUE TO PROFIT OF A BIG CORPORATION, AND SELL MY PRODUCTION TO RUSSIA, AND HAVE AN EMBARGO OFR CURIOUS REASONS.
NOT A NORTHERN EUROPEAN TO BUY A EUROPEAN CAR MADE IN CHINA, FOR THE PROFIT OF ANOTHER CORPORATION,


PS 2
Taxation money is an analogy of income to help state survive and give issues,
when you destroy the helthy taxation system, and say Big Corporations pay big amounts,
then you are lost and dead, you buy the future of your children and sell it,
supporting bankers Globalization and Big Corporations all we do is bring more immigrants, born less kids, raise taxes to low class, and soon we will face our shelves in another world,
stangers in a strange land.
AND ENGLISH PEOPLE DECIDE NOT TO ENTER THAT FUTURE, BUT TO ANOTHER,


PS3
today at East parts of EU in the name of NATO, USA has developed troops for the fear of Russian attack.
Korean corporations (co-incidense?) Develop there very well, and overpass many European corporations productions,
Notice, USA troops, Korean Corporations, NOT EU troops, not EU corporations, in a big area with high industrial production as East Europe, which might be more industrial at future, EU shows so weak, at areas where Europeans needed her hand, due to ex-communism status,
Notice Aegean sea, not Eu naval forces, but NATO forces,
SO makes Wonder is the EU so strong as we claim her to be?
or a puppet in globalizations games?



After 50 years of EU, and even inner immigration, a big idea of EU dreamers, is an anarchy system,
and we pay so high salaries to EU politicians,
We Need EU for the English Scott Bulgarian Esthonian Portoguese citizen, and not for XYZ Bank or corporation,
either change the population, bring new and make it a heaven for non Europeans, who buy and produce 'European products'
what if they change the population? nothing, the world will keep turning,

bicicleur
26-06-16, 15:10
With all respect I am not too sure if you really know what you are talking about, or maybe not too familiar with British (more English) psyche towards the EU in general? especially from the conservative party?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2f8nYMCO2I

I'm talking about Euroscepticism which is spreading and growing all over the EU and which adds up to the British island mentality.
The British never wanted the Euro nor Schengen, but leaving the EU was not a real option for them 10 years ago.

The construction that was made to make a political union was not a proper construction for that purpose and hence the European political union has failed.
Instead of a political union, a playground for politicians has been made.
That has created growing Euroscepticism and not just in Britain.

If the EU wants to prevent further calamities it will have to close down this politicians playground. But who will do that? I don't think the politcians will do it themselves.

Minty
26-06-16, 15:45
I think the Swiss are intelligent, they have been resisting joining since the beginning. The UK never really wanted to join, that is why they have only one foot in the European Union and one foot out, the other members kept on persuading them to join. Many British like English speakers, many of the EU countries don't speak English. However it is not just about that it is much more than that. This is now a disaster for them and the EU. Scottish people will see this as a great opportunity to try to gain independence, and if they can get it, the other ethnic minorities such as Catalans, Bretons, maybe Corsicans as well...will take this opportunity to try to get their independence.

Silesian
26-06-16, 16:52
....... Brexit or not, the rich and the young will always find a way to adapt, even if that means moving abroad. Those who voted for Brexit will ironically be left with even less than they have now by pushing away people who are paying their healthcare, well-fare and pensions.....
EU/Brussels needs to turn it's attention and political managerial expertise to countries like Venezuela[large oil reserves, strong central government, gun control- can do wonders], and perhaps future EU candidate Turkey.Stop focusing so much on U.K. independence.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2014/11/02/venezuela/18243787/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aV24qRyD9OI
The benefits of Turkey joining the EU, are obvious with the allocation of energy/resources to provide help for millions of refugees fleeing tyranny.

Silesian
26-06-16, 16:55
I think the Swiss are intelligent, they have been resisting joining since the beginning. The UK never really wanted to join, that is why they have only one foot in the European Union and one foot out, the other members kept on persuading them to join. Many British like English speakers, many of the EU countries don't speak English. However it is not just about that it is much more than that. This is now a disaster for them and the EU. Scottish people will see this as a great opportunity to try to gain independence, and if they can get it, the other ethnic minorities such as Catalonia, Bretons, maybe Corsica as well...will take this opportunities to try...

Let's not discriminate. Everyone who want's a democratic vote for independence no matter what country shall have their say!

Maciamo
26-06-16, 16:58
I am disappointed by some of the reactions here (nordicwarrior, Sile, Aaron1981, Maleth, Yetos), but it is not surprising from people who aren't British, haven't lived in Britain and do not have any personal tie to the country. I should have mentioned from the start where I stand personally and emotionally. I am Belgian, but I have studied and lived in England and still spend about a third of my time in the country. I have family and friends in England. I have followed the Brexit debate attentively for the last few months, most of the time from England itself, and I am as flabbergasted as most Londoners and most of the political class by the results of the referendum, especially when all opinion polls had the Remain camp winner.

I started this website 12 years ago as a travel guide to England and Belgium. I personally feel more British than Belgian and have considered in the past adopting British citizenship. I didn't because as an EU citizen that wouldn't change much. I was happy dividing my time between England and Belgium. Now, if the UK or just England and Wales are to leave the EU, it would change everything and that would make me reconsider my whole life and my future.

More importantly, I don't think that the EU can survive in the long-term without Britain. Even if it did, it wouldn't be the European Union as I have always known it. I think that the closest analogy for an American to understand how it would feel would be if the states of New England and New York were to declare their independence from the rest of the USA. Surely the USA would survive, but it wouldn't be the same country anymore, for ever.

Just like New York in the US, London is Europe's largest city, its financial capital, its most cosmopolitan city, and in my eyes also its cultural capital (I know many southern Europeans might disagree, but that's how most northern Europeans see it). The EU without London is no better than the US without New York.

Additionally English is one of the three working languages of the EU (along with French and German), and the only real lingua franca between Europeans, including in the EU neighbourhood in Brussels. It would feel very odd for EU workers from now on to discuss in English if England isn't part of the EU anymore. It would be a daily reminder of that tragic Brexit.

It's not just politicians who have warned that Brexit would be terrible for the British economy. All serious newspapers and news sites, from the Economist to the Financial Times, and from the BBC to the Guardian, all agreed on this. It would be a major blow to British scientific research, which produces 6.9% of global scientific output and represent a third of all of the EU's scientific researchers.

If the UK leaves the EU without joining Schengen, it would be catastrophic for the 3 million Europeans living in the UK and 1.3 million Britons living in the EU. Most might be force to leave the place where they have made their life, leaving behind their house, friends, country of adoption... I can't imagine such a scenario.

Leaving the EU will affect th daily life of British citizens in many more ways, as explained here by Mashable (http://mashable.com/2016/06/04/eu-referendum-brexit-issues/#qlukr9BrZkqa) and the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/feb/28/brexit-effect-everyday-life), for example. The worst would be the property crash that will ensue if the 3m EU citizens in the UK are forced to leave. This will effectively wipe out a lot of money directly out of British people's pockets (home valuation). The financial sector in London, the heart of the British economy is expected to drop by about 10%. The simultaneous crash of properties and financial services will lead to a recession that could be worse than that of 2008, and with no EU to help recover this time.

Britain would also lose numerous benefits from the EU, including consumer protection, temporary workers' rights, maternity leaves, environmental protection (ban on dangerous chemicals and pesticides), agricultural subsidies (£27bn annually), and so on.

Power77
26-06-16, 17:06
Maciamo, I'm baffled by the fact that you're repeating the controlled media's scaring tactics! The EU didn't do much for Britain anyway. It's also really not surprising that the LEAST British part of England (London(istan)) voted more in favour of Remain than Leave.

Silesian
26-06-16, 17:29
Maciamo, I'm baffled by the fact that you're repeating the controlled media's scaring tactics! The EU didn't do much for Britain anyway. It's also really not surprising that the LEAST British part of England (London(istan)) voted more in favour of Remain than Leave.
Baffling it is.
I'm surprised the nation that gave us our modern language called "English" spoken in world wide populations anywhere from 300 million - 700+/- million,and used for commerce and science, survived for thousands of years without foreign rulers, cannot run without the help of foreign people? Who feel they can write new laws/rules, and create new taxes, for the original successful autochthonous population.






Native speakers
360–400 million (2006)[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTECrystal2006424.E2.80.93426-2)
L2 speakers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_language): 400 million;
as a foreign language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_language): 600–700 million[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_language#cite_note-FOOTNOTECrystal2006424.E2.80.93426-2)

LeBrok
26-06-16, 17:46
I wonder if it is technically possible for London to separate from GB and remain in EU, the way Scotland wants to do?

Maleth
26-06-16, 17:48
I am disappointed by some of the reactions here (nordicwarrior, Sile, Aaron1981, Maleth, Yetos), but it is not surprising from people who aren't British, haven't lived in Britain and do not have any personal tie to the country..

Maciamo just for your knowledge, my G grand father is English from Surrey (that does not mean much because I do not remember him) Malta was a colony under British rule to a time I can recall in my childhood. My Grand mother lived the last 20 years of her life in London, both my brothers are married to English women (one of them returned to retire in Malta) and all their siblings are married to English people too. Myself I worked in London for 5 years, Besides I have visited England some 14 times. My work locally gets me regularly in contact with British people (not only English) so Im not that unfamiliar.

Maleth
26-06-16, 17:52
Baffling it is.
I'm surprised the nation that gave us our modern language called "English" spoken in world wide populations anywhere from 300 million - 700+/- million,and used for commerce and science, survived for thousands of years without foreign rulers, cannot run without the help of foreign people? Who feel they can write new laws/rules, and create new taxes, for the original successful autochthonous population.

Britian was ruled by many foreigners since you mentioned thousands of years. Romans, Vikings, Normans...beside the Anglo invasions. You need to check up the history :)

Maleth
26-06-16, 18:01
I wonder if it is technically possible for London to separate from GB and remain in EU, the way Scotland wants to do?

I heard that Scotland can Veto the UK leaving the EU. But I think all this will not happen. The referendum cannot be ignored, it was well debated and who voted leave did so from their heart. If others wanted to remain and did not vote, then they should have made an effort if it was so important to them. If it was a protest vote or they regret it now its too late. Everyone knew what they were doing. Best thing that can happen is for Ireland to become one country (as it used to be) Scotland gain independence and England and Wales carry on with the task they have voted for. Good or Bad there are many lessons that are going to be learned. Such is life.

bicicleur
26-06-16, 18:06
and he is right, again

https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13502107_10154250056573695_427179259271673103_n.jp g?oh=215e4d1d67802b3ecee6f360f2e078e7&oe=57ED5C7B

Power77
26-06-16, 18:12
I wonder if it is technically possible for London to separate from GB and remain in EU, the way Scotland wants to do?

Why not? London(istan) is hardly English anymore!

bicicleur
26-06-16, 18:22
I heard that Scotland can Veto the UK leaving the EU. But I think all this will not happen. The referendum cannot be ignored, it was well debated and who voted leave did so from their heart. If others wanted to remain and did not vote, then they should have made an effort if it was so important to them. If it was a protest vote or they regret it now its too late. Everyone knew what they were doing. Best thing that can happen is for Ireland to become one country (as it used to be) Scotland gain independence and England and Wales carry on with the task they have voted for. Good or Bad there are many lessons that are going to be learned. Such is life.

Ireland is not one country and there was a reason for it. It won't be that simple.

Maciamo
26-06-16, 18:22
and he is right, again

https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13502107_10154250056573695_427179259271673103_n.jp g?oh=215e4d1d67802b3ecee6f360f2e078e7&oe=57ED5C7B

Exactly ! Good old Winston always knew how to word things.

Maleth
26-06-16, 18:57
Why not? London(istan) is hardly English anymore!

That has nothing to do with the EU. Those immigrants are a result of the Empire pre EU accession. Most of the Recent immigration was mostly from EU Countries with the largest being from Poland and India has got much a bigger share then Pakistan

Maleth
26-06-16, 18:59
Complex indeed but was considered as one Island until very recently.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCJMQgfHXNI

Angela
26-06-16, 19:05
Ireland is not one country and there was a reason for it. It won't be that simple.

I agree. Unless the northern Irish have changed a very great deal very recently they're not going to want to disappear into a Catholic Ireland even if it's not so very Catholic anymore.

As for Scotland, its exit from Britain is predicated, I think, on there being a healthy European Union to join. That's true for many of the separatist movements.

If, after a hiccup or two, Britain does fine, I think you're going to see either more exits from the EU or a renegotiation of different "deals". It may suit Scotland better to stay where it can have more influence on its future and just negotiate for even more autonomy.

One of the more interesting aspects of this for me is, as I said above, that there is indeed a limit to how much the media can change people's minds. From people I know who work in the London markets and live there year round, the BBC was virtually 24 hour a day anti-Brexit content. It didn't make any difference.

@Maleth,

That was certainly vintage Thatcher: No, no, no! She'd be very happy if she were still around and compos mentis. The Tory party has indeed changed. The same thing is happening in the U.S. There are going to be some serious re-alignments and perhaps new parties forming. In my opinion, I think there's a real question whether actual "conservatives" in the Republican party are going to support Trump, although I don't know if many of them are going to formally exit from the party like George Will.

@Silesian,

Were you being serious or not? I don't know you well enough to be able to tell. :)

Maleth
26-06-16, 19:22
I agree. Unless the northern Irish have changed a very great deal very recently they're not going to want to disappear into a Catholic Ireland even if it's not so very Catholic anymore.

Religion is just a pretext for many political situations mainly driven by economic preference. No one goes round fighting and killing to have the right to pray in front of a picture of the virgin Mary anymore. Once an Irish always an Irish ;).

Power77
26-06-16, 19:25
That has nothing to do with the EU. Those immigrants are a result of the Empire pre EU accession. Most of the Recent immigration was mostly from EU Countries with the largest being from Poland and India has got much a bigger share then Pakistan

Perhaps, but that still doesn't change the fact that London (1) is the most Muslim city in Britain, (2) has a Muslim mayor, and (3) is the least ethnically English part of England. In other words, London fits all the "requirements" for being a pro-Remain area IN ENGLAND (because Scotland and Northern Ireland, as this referendum has shown, are DIFFERENT cases with DIFFERENT interests from the rest of Britain).

Maciamo
26-06-16, 19:45
Maciamo just for your knowledge, my G grand father is English from Surrey (that does not mean much because I do not remember him) Malta was a colony under British rule to a time I can recall in my childhood. My Grand mother lived the last 20 years of her life in London, both my brothers are married to English women (one of them returned to retire in Malta) and all their siblings are married to English people too. Myself I worked in London for 5 years, Besides I have visited England some 14 times. My work locally gets me regularly in contact with British people (not only English) so Im not that unfamiliar.

Good to know. But still it would seem that it does not affect you directly whether the UK leaves the EU or not. What would you change for you personally?

Maciamo
26-06-16, 19:59
Perhaps, but that still doesn't change the fact that London (1) is the most Muslim city in Britain, (2) has a Muslim mayor, and (3) is the least ethnically English part of England. In other words, London fits all the "requirements" for being a pro-Remain area IN ENGLAND (because Scotland and Northern Ireland, as this referendum has shown, are DIFFERENT cases with DIFFERENT interests from the rest of Britain).

That is factually not true. Slough in Berkshire and Leicester are the least ethnically English city in England, with only 34% of White British in Slough (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Slough) and 45% in Leicester (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Leicester).

The highest percentages of Muslims are in Blackburn (28%), Bradford (25%, peaking at 51% in Bradford West), Luton (24.5%), Slough (24%), Birmingham (22%) and Leicester (19%), all well ahead of London (12%).

Sile
26-06-16, 20:05
I am disappointed by some of the reactions here (nordicwarrior, Sile, Aaron1981, Maleth, Yetos), but it is not surprising from people who aren't British, haven't lived in Britain and do not have any personal tie to the country. I should have mentioned from the start where I stand personally and emotionally. I am Belgian, but I have studied and lived in England and still spend about a third of my time in the country. I have family and friends in England. I have followed the Brexit debate attentively for the last few months, most of the time from England itself, and I am as flabbergasted as most Londoners and most of the political class by the results of the referendum, especially when all opinion polls had the Remain camp winner.

I started this website 12 years ago as a travel guide to England and Belgium. I personally feel more British than Belgian and have considered in the past adopting British citizenship. I didn't because as an EU citizen that wouldn't change much. I was happy dividing my time between England and Belgium. Now, if the UK or just England and Wales are to leave the EU, it would change everything and that would make me reconsider my whole life and my future.

More importantly, I don't think that the EU can survive in the long-term without Britain. Even if it did, it wouldn't be the European Union as I have always known it. I think that the closest analogy for an American to understand how it would feel would be if the states of New England and New York were to declare their independence from the rest of the USA. Surely the USA would survive, but it wouldn't be the same country anymore, for ever.

Just like New York in the US, London is Europe's largest city, its financial capital, its most cosmopolitan city, and in my eyes also its cultural capital (I know many southern Europeans might disagree, but that's how most northern Europeans see it). The EU without London is no better than the US without New York.

Additionally English is one of the three working languages of the EU (along with French and German), and the only real lingua franca between Europeans, including in the EU neighbourhood in Brussels. It would feel very odd for EU workers from now on to discuss in English if England isn't part of the EU anymore. It would be a daily reminder of that tragic Brexit.

It's not just politicians who have warned that Brexit would be terrible for the British economy. All serious newspapers and news sites, from the Economist to the Financial Times, and from the BBC to the Guardian, all agreed on this. It would be a major blow to British scientific research, which produces 6.9% of global scientific output and represent a third of all of the EU's scientific researchers.

If the UK leaves the EU without joining Schengen, it would be catastrophic for the 3 million Europeans living in the UK and 1.3 million Britons living in the EU. Most might be force to leave the place where they have made their life, leaving behind their house, friends, country of adoption... I can't imagine such a scenario.

Leaving the EU will affect th daily life of British citizens in many more ways, as explained here by Mashable (http://mashable.com/2016/06/04/eu-referendum-brexit-issues/#qlukr9BrZkqa) and the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/feb/28/brexit-effect-everyday-life), for example. The worst would be the property crash that will ensue if the 3m EU citizens in the UK are forced to leave. This will effectively wipe out a lot of money directly out of British people's pockets (home valuation). The financial sector in London, the heart of the British economy is expected to drop by about 10%. The simultaneous crash of properties and financial services will lead to a recession that could be worse than that of 2008, and with no EU to help recover this time.

Britain would also lose numerous benefits from the EU, including consumer protection, temporary workers' rights, maternity leaves, environmental protection (ban on dangerous chemicals and pesticides), agricultural subsidies (£27bn annually), and so on.


Really!
maybe you should read the history of what the economists said what the EU should do and only do at the very beginning, and not interfere with each countries migration, telling which country what they should grow and if it is their turn to grow it etc etc
It was initially only suppose to be a Financial system to ease monetary funds and not one to control another people's populace on how they should live.


The European Union (http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/governmentandlaw/a/europeanuniontimeline.htm) (EU) was created by the Maastricht Treaty on November 1st 1993. It is a political and economic union between European countries which makes its own policies concerning the members’ economies, societies, laws and to some extent security. To some, the EU is an overblown bureaucracy which drains money and compromises the power of sovereign states.

Angela
26-06-16, 20:35
Religion is just a pretext for many political situations mainly driven by economic preference. No one goes round fighting and killing to have the right to pray in front of a picture of the virgin Mary anymore. Once an Irish always an Irish ;).

The religious difference translates into an economic and social difference; that's the point. The way I hear it from the Irish community here is that the hiring, union preferment, salaries, even access to social services, everything was skewed so that the Protestants had an advantage, and lots of gerrymandering of electoral districts to keep it that way. The way they tell it the Protestants didn't want to lose that advantage by joining "Catholic" Ireland.

Has all that changed? Was it not true in the past?

Maybe it's the people I know. :) There were more than a few Irish-Americans who in the past gave money to the IRA even though if asked they would have said they never supported terrorist organizations.

sparkey
26-06-16, 20:54
I agree with Maciamo's narrative that the British voted for Brexit based on an incorrect narrative about immigration, and that it will affect the country economically negatively, but I think that the economic negatives are perhaps only in the short term. I think that this is salvageable, and could even be an economic plus if they give it enough time and implement the right policies.

Much of the short-term economic damage is due to speculation and uncertainty over agreements between the EU and UK. How much of a relative advantage will the EU attempt to gain over the UK? How much spite will there be? At first, it's almost inevitable that there will be competition to the UK's detriment, but both entities tend toward international cooperation and liberalization, so it's likely that they'll settle into mutually beneficial agreements that may not be all that different from the situation during union. The banks are a particular worry, but many countries (USA, Australia, whatever) have robust financial sectors without being in any particular union. Any lingering detriments to the UK over Brexit could be offset by taking advantage of being outside the EU's expensive regulatory apparatus. Switzerland and Norway are the oft-repeated success stories that do this.

I'm not sure I trust the UK as much as I trust Switzerland and Norway to implement smart, low-regulation policies, though. What happens if the UK leaves and then Corbyn comes to power? Worst of all worlds.

Power77
26-06-16, 23:24
That is factually not true. Slough in Berkshire and Leicester are the least ethnically English city in England, with only 34% of White British in Slough (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Slough) and 45% in Leicester (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Leicester).

The highest percentages of Muslims are in Blackburn (28%), Bradford (25%, peaking at 51% in Bradford West), Luton (24.5%), Slough (24%), Birmingham (22%) and Leicester (19%), all well ahead of London (12%).

Oh come on Maciamo! Do you really think I'll believe those unsourced percentages? I mean why would London have a Muslim mayor if not a very significant part of its population is Muslim? And most (though not all) of the areas you mentioned voted mostly in favour of Remain anyway, so my point still stands.

LeBrok
26-06-16, 23:29
Oh come on Maciamo! Do you really think I'll believe those unsourced percentages? I mean why would London have a Muslim mayor if not a very significant part of its population is Muslim? And most (though not all) of the areas you mentioned voted mostly in favour of Remain anyway, so my point still stands.
For the same reason Calgary has a muslim mayor.

Voyager
26-06-16, 23:38
and he is right, again




For all those deceived by Democracy you have to cope with it, Anyway. :cool-v:
http://wist.info/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Churchill-democracy-wist_info.jpg

Yetos
26-06-16, 23:49
I am disappointed by some of the reactions here (nordicwarrior, Sile, Aaron1981, Maleth, Yetos), but it is not surprising from people who aren't British, haven't lived in Britain and do not have any personal tie to the country. I should have mentioned from the start where I stand personally and emotionally. I am Belgian, but I have studied and lived in England and still spend about a third of my time in the country. I have family and friends in England. I have followed the Brexit debate attentively for the last few months, most of the time from England itself, and I am as flabbergasted as most Londoners and most of the political class by the results of the referendum, especially when all opinion polls had the Remain camp winner.


All I want tosay is that in Greece the referendum, had another question but same meaning with Brexit,
Nothing happened,
Brexit had clear question and meaning,
and I ask,
what is better?
to leave the Union to make your own state laws?
or to put fences all over Europe. more km than cold war times and bring NATO forces to secure the boarders?
there are things we see and things we do not.
We all know Cox killer was mental ill, (was he really?) but could that come from 'eternal' unemployment?,

Do not be disapointed,
It is not the original Idea of EC that turn people against,
it is that after 50-60 years the idea stayed an idea,
and instead of improving citizens life, in some areas only worse it is,
So I do not blaim the unemployed English for his desicion,
neither I moarn for EU not having England by her site
But I have to respect the peoples choice,
After all, EU is a Democratic Union, correct?
although many of high levels officers are not elected,

we need reformation of EU, and fast, and a fiscal union based with referendums, not just signed by politicians,
either, here we are, soon we will see European countries leaving the one when road is defined,

if Mercel pushes the long time way to exit, we are all doomed,
now about EU immigrants and English immigrants at EU I am sure a solution due to today status, can be found and take place fast for existing ones,

as you see, there are no personalities in EU like 20 years before,
and Mercel alone can not protect Union,
On the other hand, let England and Wales alone, they want to,

NO NEED FOR MOARNING
EITHER EU
EITHER UK,

all we need is fast referendums at N ireland and Scottland and a quick exit, to go both ahead,
either we will all face a 7 years wounded beast called EU, and a maniac England,

OR PUSH THE TTIP treaty FAST TO MAKE THE BIGGEST UNION (I don't think England will not enter that treaty)

ElHorsto
27-06-16, 02:18
None of the EU leaders even thinks of resigning, except Cameron who failed to convince the people of the "EU greatness".

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 04:52
Hi Oriental-- long time indeed. I've come out of Eupedia retirement for this particular subject-- it's that important

Maciamo-- two brief points..
1. You seem to have an issue with older folks. Remember though, with age comes wisdom.

2. If the youth are so adept at dealing with change, well here comes a fresh new slate.

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 05:00
Maciamo, I am not heartless and I do wish you the best in these changing times. I have much enjoyed your site over the years.

But leaving the EU was and is the best way forward.

Maciamo
27-06-16, 07:54
David Lammy, the Labour MP for Tottenhem in London and former minister for higher education has posted an article in the Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/commentisfree/2016/jun/26/second-referendum-consequences-brexit-grave) calling for a second referendum because, as he puts it, the consequences of Brexit are too grave and would lead to the dissolution of the United Kingdom. The article reflects perfectly my feelings and, I believe, those of the millions of Brits who voted to remain in the EU and went on to sign the petition for the second referendum. As Mr Lammy explains, when people voted last Thursday they didn't know it would prompt the independence of Scotland and Northern Ireland from the UK. That would mean not just the end of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, but also the end of the Union Jack and many symbols that many British people strongly associated with and probably of the British monarchy too. So are British people ready to give up their name, flag, symbols and traditions in order to quit the EU, just because a part of the population used the referendum as a no-confidence vote for the prime minister and didn't think of the consequences of their vote?

Here is a section of what Mr Lammy wrote. You will notice how closely it reflects what I said in my original post.



The impact of an economic downturn on my constituents is too devastating to contemplate. The impact will be similarly catastrophic across whole swaths of our country, especially in areas that are already struggling. In the manmade recession to follow, the worse off you are, the worse your future will be.

We need to get real, quickly: $2tn was wiped off global markets on Friday; the pound has plummeted; and Moody’s has already downgraded our credit rating from “stable” to “negative”. A Brexit would be self-immolation.

Nigel Farage and his gang of Brexiteers would have never quit or given up the fight on the basis of a result that was this close. You can’t write off 48% of voters without a serious fight, and we cannot usher in rule by plebiscite which unleashes the “wisdom” of resentment and prejudice reminiscent of 1930s Europe.

Are we simply going to stand idly by and let a recession caused by the hubris of Boris Johnson push more and more people into poverty? Are we going to let our links with the outside world be cast aside, leaving our children to grow up without the same opportunities for travel, study and cultural exchange that my generation have taken for granted?

Since Friday morning Britain has woken up to a hangover of nightmarish proportions. We could all see from the look on the faces of Johnson and Michael Gove that they know that they will be managing a perpetual decline in our economy and our national standing and reputation.

It is very clear that the leave campaigners do not have the slightest semblance of a plan. The promises that the campaign was built on were nothing more than a pack of lies. Before bedtime on Friday the claims about £350m extra cash to spend on public services and the ending of free movement of labour had already unravelled before our eyes.

The future of our country, of our young people and of their children and grandchildren is too much to throw away on the basis of a duplicitous campaign that has already fallen apart.

It is clear that people are angry with the political class and that, with the European Union coming to represent everything that is wrong with our country, they took this opportunity to give the establishment a kicking. But is Johnson going to care about these disaffected people who feel left out and let down? Not a jot. We are slowly waking up to the fact that the emperor has no clothes. Is a post-Brexit government going to inject money into the areas that lose out on employers and investment because we leave the European Union? Not a chance in hell.

The referendum was advisory and non-binding, in contrast to the referendum on electoral reform in 2011 which imposed a legal obligation on the government to legislate. Almost 500 members of parliament declared themselves in favour of remain, and it is within their powers to stop this madness through a vote in parliament.

It is also within parliament’s powers to call a second referendum, now that the dust has begun to settle and the reality of a post-Brexit nation is coming into view. We need a second referendum at the very least, on the basis of a plan that is yet to even be drawn up.

bicicleur
27-06-16, 08:17
Allthough there were a lot of stupid voters, and the campaign was playing on sentiments, it should be a very clear signal to the EU leaders that there was a majority in Britain to opt out.
But there is no reaction at all of the EU leaders, execept that 'they should explain their project better'. No question about the project itself nor the way it is managed. What an arrogance.

Voyager
27-06-16, 08:47
The Brexit is a sign of distrust toward Bruxelles not to Europe.
The real problem of any federalism system is the risk of dilution of responsability, specialy if we lack of real unity. At the end, Nobody is responsible for nothing. At the end it 's the open door to individuals greeds.IMO.

Minty
27-06-16, 08:47
I can see that you have not followed the Leave vs Remain campaign closely in the last few months as I have. The Leave campaigners argued that EU citizens living in the UK costs the NHS (Britain's fully-subsidised healthcare system) billions of pounds, when in fact EU citizens in the UK contribute vastly more to the British economy than they cost it (UK gains £20 billion from European migrants according to a UCL economist) (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/05/eu-migrants-uk-gains-20bn-ucl-study). For this reason the Leave campaign is seen mostly as deceitful (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/25/boris-johnson-michael-gove-eu-liars) and xenophobic (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/25/the-uncomfortable-question-was-the-brexit-vote-based-on-racism/) and has only been supported by Far Right parties in Europe, such as Marine Le Pen in France (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/24/european-far-right-hails-britains-brexit-vote-marine-le-pen).

The question of Syrian refugees is irrelevant to the UK for three reasons:

1) Britain is an island and refugees can't just walk there by ignoring political borders, as they did elsewhere in Europe. .


They can fly there, flights are so cheap these days. Or even by boats.


2) The UK is not in the EU's visa-free, border-free zone (Schengen Area), so leaving the EU won't change anything in that regard. In fact leaving the EU would surely prompt the UK to join Schengen like Norway and Switzerland and therefore allowing any Muslim immigrants accepted in, say, France or Greece, to legally live in the UK too. In other words being in the EU but not in Schengen allows Britain to benefit economically from the EU without having to open its borders.

The problem is it only seems to benefit the upper class. My colleagues from Northern England are very upset with the EU and what it is doing to the UK, they have Blacks, Arabs and Eastern Europeans all wanting to come in, too much is too much, they say.



There are almost no Syrian refugees in Britain today. Only 5000 have been accepted, much less than Denmark (which is 12x less populous than Britain) or Belgium, and even remote Australia (3x less populous than the UK). In comparison Germany has already welcomed 600,000 refugees, i.e. over one thousand times more than the UK ! You can check statistics on the number of Syrian refugees by country here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugees_of_the_Syrian_Civil_War)..

There are none today, it does not mean there will be none in the future. In Australia, we had Australian born Muslims (their parents were refugees) flew to Indonesia then try to fly from Malaysia to Syria to join the battle. They were caught in Indonesia before they had the chance to fly to Malaysia then to Syria to fulfill their "mission" and their Australian passports were cancelled. These refugees' children one day can continue to advance their "muslim invasion" one day, once they got their German passports.


So clearly Brexit has nothing to do with Syrian or other refugees. On the other hand, Britain has the third largest Muslim communities in Europe, nearly 5 million of them, mostly Pakistani and Bangladeshi from the former British Raj. Yet Brexit is not going to change anything about that. There has never been any talk by any party to expel Muslim immigrants - only European people living and working in the UK ! In fact, even Priti Patel, the British minister for employment, who is of Indian descent (although Hindu, not Muslim) ardently supported the Leave campaign (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12160196/Priti-Patel-tells-Tory-MPs-she-plans-on-playing-a-leading-role-in-Brexit-campaign.html).

The English people seem to have accepted their Indian and Pakistani immigrants, but they are not so keen to take on more Eastern European immigrants and Turkish or Middle Eastern immigrants without their own way of immigration control. They feel that the EU is deciding for them. That is the message I am getting from working with British.

In the first post you labelled the working class, the uneducated people "nincompoops", Brexit is the result of Elites, highly educated people looking down and ignoring the working class for decades.

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 10:22
A second referendum ignores the will of the people... they have spoken.

You may not like their answer, but saying the decision is non-binding... I don't want to entertain this notion because of the doors it could open.

The EU needs to learn from Brexit-- and learn quickly. A major course correction is overdue.

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 10:29
Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Greece...

bicicleur
27-06-16, 10:51
The Brexit is a sign of distrust toward Bruxelles not to Europe.
The real problem of any federalism system is the risk of dilution of responsability, specialy if we lack of real unity. At the end, Nobody is responsible for nothing. At the end it 's the open door to individuals greeds.IMO.

That is certainly the case with the EU.

bicicleur
27-06-16, 10:55
A second referendum ignores the will of the people... they have spoken.

You may not like their answer, but saying the decision is non-binding... I don't want to entertain this notion because of the doors it could open.

The EU needs to learn from Brexit-- and learn quickly. A major course correction is overdue.

A 2nd referendum is possible, certainly as the split was very close, 48 - 52 %.
But if they want to do that, they should do it quick, no time to waist.
Britain should get his mind straight.

And Europe should learn some lessons.

bicicleur
27-06-16, 11:25
Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Greece...

Leaving the EU is stupid.
But the EU should change quickly.
Frustration about the EU policy and management of Europe by the politicians is very high.
These people are particrats, appointed by their political fractions, they are not elected and they are not acountable for their actions. Furthermore they squander money and they are hughely overpaid.

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 12:57
side note: I tried to give a thumbs down to Maciamo's thread opening, but system said I already voted?

This would have made eight thumbs down to one thumb up. The thumbs have spoken.

Maleth
27-06-16, 13:21
and he is right, again

https://scontent-ams3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13502107_10154250056573695_427179259271673103_n.jp g?oh=215e4d1d67802b3ecee6f360f2e078e7&oe=57ED5C7B

Probably its a normal reaction and disappointment for not being re-elected after world war two. One would have thought that Churchill would have been voted in with a landslide right after being victorious after world war 11 but instead suffered a heavy defeat in the 1945 elections. It must have been a great disappointment, and people do say things like that in this situation. He was referring to the British electorate who anyway holds Winston Churchill in high regard.....but still voted him out

Maleth
27-06-16, 13:48
Perhaps, but that still doesn't change the fact that London (1) is the most Muslim city in Britain, (2) has a Muslim mayor, and (3) is the least ethnically English part of England. In other words, London fits all the "requirements" for being a pro-Remain area IN ENGLAND (because Scotland and Northern Ireland, as this referendum has shown, are DIFFERENT cases with DIFFERENT interests from the rest of Britain).

You would find that many 'indigenous' Londoners and other British people who made London their home (so to speak) who are a majority would be more acceptant of other cultures and somehow a good percentage are born with it. The countryside (and not only in England are usually more nationalistic and the lower the income the more nationalistic they would be. London is the Richest city in the UK in general and diversity has something to do with that too. The Indians, Bangladeshi's, Pakistanis and Africans would be considered British too and their roots in London go back to the '40's. There has always been an anti immigrant party in the England such as National Front who used to Lobby against these minorities. However the irony is that the influx of workers from the EU seem to have helped to make these parties more popular.

An election of a London major would need much more then simply a Muslim vote, and support from much a broader spectrum. At any rate he attended the gay pride with his wife, not something very comparable with IS ideology like so many far right groups portrayed him to be!

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/06/26/londons-muslim-mayor-slams-brexit-vote-gay-pride-event/

Maleth
27-06-16, 14:10
Good to know. But still it would seem that it does not affect you directly whether the UK leaves the EU or not. What would you change for you personally?

It would not change much personally, accept the fact of the impact it might have on the EU in general. My country seems to be heavily affected, as there are close historical links. However that can swing both ways. We could also benefit. It all depends on the new terms negotiated. My feeling is that there will be a mellow and smooth transaction. It works better and in the interest of both sides. The downside is that if the Uk (or England) keeps on doing well or even does better, then the EU will never be the same like we know it now. The UK is going to serve like a pilot project in some respect. The results will have positive or negative impact on the EU depending on the outcome. Its a wait and see issue.

Maleth
27-06-16, 14:19
The religious difference translates into an economic and social difference; that's the point. The way I hear it from the Irish community here is that the hiring, union preferment, salaries, even access to social services, everything was skewed so that the Protestants had an advantage, and lots of gerrymandering of electoral districts to keep it that way. The way they tell it the Protestants didn't want to lose that advantage by joining "Catholic" Ireland.

Has all that changed? Was it not true in the past?

Maybe it's the people I know. :) There were more than a few Irish-Americans who in the past gave money to the IRA even though if asked they would have said they never supported terrorist organizations.

Thats how I know it too. The EU has managed to open the borders between north and south which I am hoping it could be seen as something positive and now they are used to it. That might be compromised now, but again we do not know what the negotiations are going to bring about. Its still all a closed box.

bicicleur
27-06-16, 14:32
Probably its a normal reaction and disappointment for not being re-elected after world war two. One would have thought that Churchill would have been voted in with a landslide right after being victorious after world war 11 but instead suffered a heavy defeat in the 1945 elections. It must have been a great disappointment, and people do say things like that in this situation. He was referring to the British electorate who anyway holds Winston Churchill in high regard.....but still voted him out

do you know when and why Churchill said this <
I think is a general truth, not less today than after WW II

Voyager
27-06-16, 15:01
Did you see this Video about ESM (European Stability Mechanism) here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZZMXNr95Zs) on Youtube ? If It's true, the ESM members seem to have a real oversized Power over the Peoples. No? It's look like they are above the laws? Did you see the Article 32 on their Immunities and Privileges (ESM treaty on line). Of course the Brits didn't sign it but Greece, France, Portugal, Italy, Spain etc... and Germany signed it...
The link here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XGrt3h0XP8) for the ESM Youtube video explaining ESM, just to be fair and let people to have their own point of view.

bicicleur
27-06-16, 16:04
this is the comment of Die Welt :

They see Brexit as a symptom of general distrust of the EU.
They blaim the arrogance of Junker and the desastrous way Merkel handled the refugee crisis, without consulting any one else.

Result is people voting for nationalistic parties like Orban in Hungary or populist leftists like Syriza in Greece or Podemos in Spain.

http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article156541722/Die-Briten-haben-auch-Merkels-Alleingaenge-abgewaehlt.html

In Italy the populist Beppe Grillo won.
Now Renzi decided to organize a referendum in Italy about the implementation of institutionial reforms. He said he'll resign if the people vote against.
There is a big chance the campaign will play on sentiments, just like the Brexit campaign. And Beppe Grillo will claim all Italian problems are due to the EU and the Euro currency.

All over Europe there is discontent about politics talking to much and doing to little.

Power77
27-06-16, 16:06
Don't any of you think it is unbelievable how can smart people, such as Maciamo and bicicleur, support a second referendum (which is anti-democratic in both theory and practice)? BTW, David Lammy can always go back to Guyana if he's not happy with the decision of 52% of the British people (after all, he could enjoy pseudo-democracy there).

Angela
27-06-16, 17:16
this is the comment of Die Welt :

They see Brexit as a symptom of general distrust of the EU.
They blaim the arrogance of Junker and the desastrous way Merkel handled the refugee crisis, without consulting any one else.

Result is people voting for nationalistic parties like Orban in Hungary or populist leftists like Syriza in Greece or Podemos in Spain.

http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article156541722/Die-Briten-haben-auch-Merkels-Alleingaenge-abgewaehlt.html



Very perceptive analysis, in my opinion.

Faced with a flood of undocumented, un-screened refugees, the EU was unable to craft a unified response, and left each individual nation to deal with it alone. That just highlighted the fact that the political mechanisms don't exist for effective action.

Economically, some have prospered, but for others it's a story of stagnation and high youth unemployment.

Greater flexibility and creative thinking were necessary, and from what I can see the current leaders are incapable of it.

They may think that by brutally punishing Britain they will prevent a mass exit, but I think it may backfire on them.

As for having a second referendum or having Parliament negate it in some way, all I can say is you either have a democracy or you don't. If your leaders call for a referendum and then refuse to abide by it you can toss all of it out the window. What is the plan? Is it to keep on having votes until the leaders get the result they want? This is why you have to be careful and judicious in calling for referendums. You're opening Pandora's box.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/the-eu-will-treat-britain-like-greece/

LeBrok
27-06-16, 17:16
What if Conservative party will decide not to implement conclusion of referendum, not to leave, argumenting that this is not in line with their party vision and policy? They can declare that this matter will be left for next elected government/party to decide.

bicicleur
27-06-16, 17:46
Don't any of you think it is unbelievable how can smart people, such as Maciamo and bicicleur, support a second referendum (which is anti-democratic in both theory and practice)? BTW, David Lammy can always go back to Guyana if he's not happy with the decision of 52% of the British people (after all, he could enjoy pseudo-democracy there).

http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

a referendum is not democracy, it's insanity

bicicleur
27-06-16, 17:52
What if Conservative party will decide not to implement conclusion of referendum, not to leave, argumenting that this is not in line with their party vision and policy? They can declare that this matter will be left for next elected government/party to decide.

the dammage is done, the ghost is out of the bottle, now decisions have to be made
the longer you wait, the longer the uncertainty
Cameron wants to resign in october and leave negotiations for his successor,
but neither investors nor the EU are prepared to wait any longer

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 19:43
As an American I have to take some responsibility for this... First we had Bush wrongly invade the Middle East (Iraq), then we elected a feckless leader in Obama to further louse things up. The Arab Spring caused by our mistakes launched the migrant crisis.

Two horrible Presidents in a row.

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 19:49
My policy regarding migrants from Syria would be to accept all female applicants and all children under sixteen. Adult males would have to stay and fight to protect their homeland. Simple I know... but what else is there?

(If Sweden and Germany had tried my approach they would both be more content with their respective conditions.)

nordicwarrior
27-06-16, 19:58
In my defense, I neither voted for Obama nor Bush. I also spoke out loudly against the Iraqi invasion...

Ron Paul would have performed so much better.

Maleth
27-06-16, 20:40
I think is a general truth, not less today than after WW II

.....except when the results are to our liking......then we say the people were sensible.

Yetos
27-06-16, 20:50
My policy regarding migrants from Syria would be to accept all female applicants and all children under sixteen. Adult males would have to stay and fight to protect their homeland. Simple I know... but what else is there?

(If Sweden and Germany had tried my approach they would both be more content with their respective conditions.)

But it happened the oposite,
If I was not married i would go there for mariage,
there Women fight and men runaway to Europe,
ΡΙΨΑΣΠΙΔΕΣ,

Sile
27-06-16, 20:54
This chit-chat about a new referendum is starting to look like the irish vote of many years ago, when the irish said no to the EU and the EU kept having referendum until they ( the EU ) got their want

As I said, the EU is a Feudal system, where the people do not count , but are simply serfs to their masters!

Maleth
27-06-16, 20:56
What if Conservative party will decide not to implement conclusion of referendum, not to leave, argumenting that this is not in line with their party vision and policy? They can declare that this matter will be left for next elected government/party to decide.

That would solve nothing LeBrok, it will only suppress the reality. Its been highly debated, the question was straight forward influential institutions warned and advised of consequences. Some 30% did not even bother to place a ballot, 52% said I want to leave confident that they can do better out of the EU and all the warnings are simple scare mongering, so what is the point in keeping them in?. It was easy and clear. In or Out, no tricky questions. There is lots to learn from this. There are always a + out of a negative situation and always some kind of - out of a positive situation. Things just have to take their course. History is full of such situations.

Yetos
27-06-16, 20:59
I think the next chalenge is FRANCE
if Le pen manage to gather a big % at elections of 2017
she might ask for a referendum to exit EU

I do not believe that Spain and Italy would dare such a thing.
If Brussels (EU, not Belgium) did not act fast in many many subjects, until April 2017,
we might see another exit,

LeBrok
28-06-16, 01:27
That would solve nothing LeBrok, it will only suppress the reality. Its been highly debated, the question was straight forward influential institutions warned and advised of consequences. Some 30% did not even bother to place a ballot, 52% said I want to leave confident that they can do better out of the EU and all the warnings are simple scare mongering, so what is the point in keeping them in?. It was easy and clear. In or Out, no tricky questions. There is lots to learn from this. There are always a + out of a negative situation and always some kind of - out of a positive situation. Things just have to take their course. History is full of such situations.Wouldn't it be wise for GB to first negotiate new trade deals and people movement deals with other countries before asking for separation from EU? This process is usually long and takes years to accomplish. Conservative party government might chose to "drag their legs" due to this process, thinking that situation and people sentiment might change with time.

Maleth
28-06-16, 09:53
Wouldn't it be wise for GB to first negotiate new trade deals and people movement deals with other countries before asking for separation from EU? This process is usually long and takes years to accomplish. Conservative party government might chose to "drag their legs" due to this process, thinking that situation and people sentiment might change with time.

Let us face it, the UK already had much more concessions then any other country within the EU. Did not join Euro and neither Schengen, Cameron has won further concessions recently not to further integrate politically and on removing social benefits for migrants who are claiming without having worked. Irrelevant of all this there was still a vote to pull out. My question is why an effort to stay in? I think its fair to say that the UK has been the most difficult country when it comes to conduct EU affairs as in chronic and often insultive (as in Farage who lost no time to pass his point through by right out ridicule and insults while getting paid by the EU institutions) Should there be a limit? Of course I say yes. The only concession I would have with England and Wales (I augur Scotland to join and N. Ireland to join the South) is with programmes that benefit the youths as in Education and Research and exchange programs. Otherwise Out is Out. It was clear all the way. Boris Johnson (who's Great Grand father was Turkish Ali Kemal and the surname changed to Johnson) seems very calm and has to live up to the voters expectations. Now we all wait and see how this is going to happen. Forcing England and Wales to stay in the EU is highly undemocratic. If the conservative government drags its feet indefinitely that it would be one of the greatest disservices ever recorded in British History, because thats not what the English and Welsh voted for. Johnson will be hoping for a Trump win, then it put him in a much better position in negotiations both of them would pull Russia in the Picture ;). Interesting times ahead.

Taranis
28-06-16, 13:02
On the farcial events of the past days, I have to say this: in the referendum, the United Kingdom did not vote to leave the European Union, but to exit its own union, that is the Union of England and Scotland (1707). At least, that's the most likely result at this point, and buffoons like Nigel Farage are still celebrating this as their victory. In the meantime, rating agencies have downgraded the UK (http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36644934), Gibraltar is discussing about staying with Scotland after its independence (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36639770), and even Wales is discussing independence (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/27/its-time-to-put-welsh-independence-on-agenda-leanne-wood) (despite the fact that they majorly voted "out").

I have to say, David Cameron now makes the blunders of one Neville Chamberlain look pale in comparison.

sparkey
28-06-16, 17:58
Yikes, Taranis, you're not usually prone to hyperbole like this. Point by point:


They did vote to leave the EU.
There will still be the UK without Scotland, and there's nothing wrong with the Scots leaving if they so choose. Just like Brexit, Scottish independence is a workable situation.
Current downgrades are due to uncertainty, not due to Brexit itself, since Brexit hasn't even happened yet. The UK could implement long-term policies that make it keep an even more solid hold on a AAA credit rating than they had in the EU. (Although, I admit that I don't necessarily trust them to do this.)
Wales has been discussing independence for hundreds of years, let them have their referendum that will probably lose.
Cameron's actions allowed the people of his country to determine their sovereign status. Chamberlain's actions--at least according to popular history--allowed Hitler run amok and threaten the sovereignty of other countries without their consent. How is this comparison remotely apt?

Voyager
28-06-16, 19:22
I think that UK is the first casualty of European Federalism. Migrants Problem is just a side argument. The main argument is the feeling that Bruxelles want to decide for the European Peoples, I heard this argument quite often from Brexit peoples. Euro money leads us to a Federalism system at the end. Federalism is much more coercive than a simple commercial Union of free nations. The European Peoples view it more as a trap. Next, Frexit is getting likely IMO.

Coriolan
28-06-16, 19:32
I agree with Taranis that Brexit will be the end of the UK. There cannot be a United Kingdom without Scotland. The UK was created by the Act of the Union between England and Scotland. England already ruled over Wales and Ireland for many centuries before that, since Norman times, but there was never a United Kingdom before Scotland, just England and its dominions.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Coriolan
28-06-16, 19:35
I heard in the news that there were storms in heavy rain in southern England the day of the referendum and that prevented a lot of pro remain voters from going out and casting their vote. If the weather had been better or the storm had been in Northern England the results of the referendum would have been different. Can you really dismantle a country or leave the EU just because of bad weather?

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Yetos
28-06-16, 21:03
Next, Frexit is getting likely IMO.

I believe they are the second who would dare to do such,

France at spring of 2017,

Angela
28-06-16, 21:04
So, votes should be invalidated because "leave" people are made of hardier stuffy than "stay" people, or cared more about the outcome? I've voted in rain storms before, and depending on the part of the country you may have to go out in the middle of a snowstorm as well.

That's the way it goes. It's why you're supposed to energize your base.

One thing I know: all of this hysteria in the press will guarantee at least a short term negative economic impact for Britain. As for Scotland, as I've said before, the smartest move would be to hold their fire and not be hasty; this may be the start of a fire sale for the EU.

That said, some of the stories coming out about Polish migrants being harassed are more than unfortunate. The troglodytes always come out at times like this.

sparkey
28-06-16, 21:13
I agree with Taranis that Brexit will be the end of the UK. There cannot be a United Kingdom without Scotland. The UK was created by the Act of the Union between England and Scotland. England already ruled over Wales and Ireland for many centuries before that, since Norman times, but there was never a United Kingdom before Scotland, just England and its dominions.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

The history here isn't quite correct. Although "United Kingdom" was sometimes used colloquially after union with Scotland, the official name from 1707-1800 was "Great Britain." "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" became official after official union with Ireland in 1801. Prior to that, Ireland had been a client state of England, not part of the UK. So, if Scotland leaves, the UK will still exist by virtue of England being united with Northern Ireland and Wales (since Wales is now devolved).

Coriolan
28-06-16, 21:33
The history here isn't quite correct. Although "United Kingdom" was sometimes used colloquially after union with Scotland, the official name from 1707-1800 was "Great Britain." "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" became official after official union with Ireland in 1801. Prior to that, Ireland had been a client state of England, not part of the UK. So, if Scotland leaves, the UK will still exist by virtue of England being united with Northern Ireland and Wales (since Wales is now devolved).
Except that Northern Ireland will quit the UK too. They voted to remain in the EU and that's a good opportunity to finally reunify Ireland.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Taranis
28-06-16, 22:08
Yikes, Taranis, you're not usually prone to hyperbole like this. Point by point:

Sparkey, I have to respectfully say that, although my assessment may come about as sensationalist, I do think my conclusion is indeed well-founded. The reasons are the following:





They did vote to leave the EU.


This is true, but what about the implementation? The way I see it, there is no good option here.





There will still be the UK without Scotland, and there's nothing wrong with the Scots leaving if they so choose. Just like Brexit, Scottish independence is a workable situation.


As I said, if Scotland leaves the Union, by what token would they still call themselves "United Kingdom"? As Angus Robertson put it earlier, "what really matters is that we live in an outward-looking country, and not a diminished Little Britain." As regards your point of the term "United Kingdom" being used officially only from 1801, if Northern Ireland leaves too (not implausible, given the majority support for remaining in the referendum), then it will literally be only England and Wales. The way I see it, the way Brexit is (not) implemented, the situation is everything but workable.





Current downgrades are due to uncertainty, not due to Brexit itself, since Brexit hasn't even happened yet. The UK could implement long-term policies that make it keep an even more solid hold on a AAA credit rating than they had in the EU. (Although, I admit that I don't necessarily trust them to do this.)


I for one do not think that the downgrades are due to uncertainty, or let me say, not only. The real problem is: the United Kingdom literally has no exit strategy (which is one of the reasons they are so hesitant now). One reason is, they did not genuinely think that the referendum would actually result in a 'leave' - even the ardent supporters of the Brexit were genuinely surprised by the outcome. If they had prepared, they would have issued article 50 already. This is why I said the situation is "farcial".





Wales has been discussing independence for hundreds of years, let them have their referendum that will probably lose.


This is true, and I for one would agree that the referendum has slim chances of succeeding, but the fact that this even on the table now is in itself alarming.





Cameron's actions allowed the people of his country to determine their sovereign status.


The way I see it, Cameron could have forseen that depending on the outcome of the referendum (i.e. Britain as a whole voting in favour of leaving, but Scotland in particular voting unanimously in favour of remaining), the bid for Scottish independence would be back on the table. In my opinion, even risking this is an incredible blunder.





Chamberlain's actions--at least according to popular history--allowed Hitler run amok and threaten the sovereignty of other countries without their consent. How is this comparison remotely apt?



The comparison is apt because both David Cameron and Neville Chamberlain gambled hard (with very high stakes) and lost, and resigned afterwards. You can ask yourself, which one is worse? Delaying - at that point (1938-1939) - the inevitable, that is war with Germany. Or destroying a 309 years old union between two countries on the whim of a referendum?

Yetos
28-06-16, 22:48
I wonder with all these historical dates,
which are very interesting I must say, and show the historical back of UK
I wonder when the ghost of Mary Stuart arise?
before midnight or after?

anyway, I still believe at quick action of article 50 of EU,
and a referendum for Scotland and N Ireland, before it is ended,
Britain will face tremendous changes, and probably will keep her 'colours' but will not be the same,

Anyway I was reading today that Mayor of London is puting more obstacles, asking aytonomy of London,
that will make England a confedarate country,
the demands that London mayor is asking are very dangerous, and might create even civil troubles,
making London an autonomy city inside England,
I smell troubles there,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/24/londoners-want-their-own-independence-after-brexit-result/

it seems that 1948 symbolical year of colonial policy ending will return to Europe as oposite.
and the lady that stayed at london at WW2 is too old,
and the prince is too young to handlle the inner civilian crisis.


<<A petition (https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-declare-london-independent-from-the-uk-and-apply-to-join-the-eu?recruiter=22332978&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive) asking for Mayor Sadiq Khan to .declare London independent has drawn more than 175,000 signatures "London is an international city, and we want to remain at the heart of Europe," the petition reads. "Mayor Sadiq, wouldn't you prefer to be President Sadiq? Make it happen!">>

so if 'Brittania who rules the world' have lost all its colonies etc etc, loose Scottland or N Ireland which are considered also other nations it can be swallowed, allow hard to do it,
BUT IF ENGLAND LOSES LONDON WILL BE A HISTORICAL DISATER,

just imagine their Queen at her palace.
the queenn of England to be living in a presidential confederate city called London :confused2::confused2::thinking::thinking::shocked ::shocked: :laughing::laughing: :angry::angry:

Minty
29-06-16, 04:24
https://www.facebook.com/jacques.jordens/videos/1074675759265199/?pnref=story

Minty
29-06-16, 04:41
I wonder with all these historical dates,
which are very interesting I must say, and show the historical back of UK
I wonder when the ghost of Mary Stuart arise?
before midnight or after?

anyway, I still believe at quick action of article 50 of EU,
and a referendum for Scotland and N Ireland, before it is ended,
Britain will face tremendous changes, and probably will keep her 'colours' but will not be the same,

Anyway I was reading today that Mayor of London is puting more obstacles, asking aytonomy of London,
that will make England a confedarate country,
the demands that London mayor is asking are very dangerous, and might create even civil troubles,
making London an autonomy city inside England,
I smell troubles there,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/24/londoners-want-their-own-independence-after-brexit-result/

it seems that 1948 symbolical year of colonial policy ending will return to Europe as oposite.
and the lady that stayed at london at WW2 is too old,
and the prince is too young to handlle the inner civilian crisis.


<<A petition (https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-declare-london-independent-from-the-uk-and-apply-to-join-the-eu?recruiter=22332978&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=share_twitter_responsive) asking for Mayor Sadiq Khan to .declare London independent has drawn more than 175,000 signatures "London is an international city, and we want to remain at the heart of Europe," the petition reads. "Mayor Sadiq, wouldn't you prefer to be President Sadiq? Make it happen!">>

so if 'Brittania who rules the world' have lost all its colonies etc etc, loose Scottland or N Ireland which are considered also other nations it can be swallowed, allow hard to do it,
BUT IF ENGLAND LOSES LONDON WILL BE A HISTORICAL DISATER,

just imagine their Queen at her palace.
the queenn of England to be living in a presidential confederate city called London :confused2::confused2::thinking::thinking::shocked ::shocked: :laughing::laughing: :angry::angry:


Those signatures are fake, they found 77000 fake signatures, as hackers claim responsibility for 'prank', another one of those terrorists's plan to destroy Europe.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-27/second-eu-referendum-brexit-petition-investigated-for-fraud/7548284

ElHorsto
29-06-16, 05:26
Despite the drama, I see a realistic opportunity that the divorce will eventually strengthen both EU and Britain. Berlin and Paris will become more important. Merkel already announced big increase of military budget. Given that Britain already has it's own strong military, the Brexit makes sense somewhat.
But the Brexit drama will go on for yet a couple of months. The risks remain high. Bank crashes might happen for instance, Scotland might secede. The EURO and the arrogance of many leaders in Europe remain problems. Interesting times.
http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-if-britain-must-choose-between-europe-and-the-open-sea-she-must-always-choose-the-open-winston-churchill-126-97-15.jpg

Coriolan
29-06-16, 07:51
Those signatures are fake, they found 77000 fake signatures, as hackers claim responsibility for 'prank', another one of those terrorists's plan to destroy Europe.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-27/second-eu-referendum-brexit-petition-investigated-for-fraud/7548284
You are confusing two different petitions. The 77000 fake signatures were part of 4 million signatures for a second Brexit referendum, not for the petition to declare London independent.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Voyager
29-06-16, 08:46
Despite the drama, I see a realistic opportunity that the divorce will eventually strengthen both EU and Britain. Berlin and Paris will become more important. Merkel already announced big increase of military budget. Given that Britain already has it's own strong military, the Brexit makes sense somewhat.
But the Brexit drama will go on for yet a couple of months. The risks remain high. Bank crashes might happen for instance, Scotland might secede. The EURO and the arrogance of many leaders in Europe remain problems. Interesting times.

Britain was a stone in the European shoes, anyway, on its path to a Federal Europe. The Brexit was mandatory. Britain would have never been a member of a federal construction of Europe anyway. And I am pretty sure the federal construction as the Emperor Carlos Magnus is in Junker 's mind. The French and German will be eaten at the federal sauce if no reaction. I propose Aix la Chapelle (Aachen) as the new capital if not already decided.:smile:

bicicleur
29-06-16, 09:29
Britain was a stone in the European shoes, anyway, on its path to a Federal Europe. The Brexit was mandatory. Britain would have never been a member of a federal construction of Europe anyway. And I am pretty sure the federal construction as the Emperor Carlos Magnus is in Junker 's mind. The French and German will be eaten at the federal sauce if no reaction. I propose Aix la Chapelle (Aachen) as the new capital if not already decided.:smile:

Indeed, more French and German dominance of the EU is to be expected, as the British counterweight has gone.
This could stimulate the desire for the exit of other member states.

Minty
29-06-16, 09:39
You are confusing two different petitions. The 77000 fake signatures were part of 4 million signatures for a second Brexit referendum, not for the petition to declare London independent.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

I am not confused I knew the difference except I think that one is fake too, this is just another way to take advantage from the British people's misfortune and loot from them, making people more confused. This is no different from robbing an unfortunate fire victim. It shows how easy people can hack into systems and create a fake report these days. On the other hand, the 77000 fake signatures can also be a great way to purposefully discredit a petition. Now I am split in my opinion. It can go either way. I should have made myself clearer, I should not post in a hurry next time. 7823

I've just noticed something, (if you take a good look at the right hand side where it says sign this petition)https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-declare-london-independent-from-the-uk-and-apply-to-join-the-eu you can be from anywhere and sign up for this petition. If people from North Korea and Russia or the Middle East whoever Europe's enemy maybe sign this petition what is the difference between this one and the other petition that is fake? On the other hand there can be people who are friends with the British who think they are doing London a favor and signing up but this is not the world's decision, this is the British people's decision.

Taranis
29-06-16, 12:06
Indeed, more French and German dominance of the EU is to be expected, as the British counterweight has gone.
This could stimulate the desire for the exit of other member states.

I'm very sceptical on the prospects of a "domino effect" in other member states. The situation in the UK was unique in so far as that the Cameron administration offered the referendum in the first place - as of the moment I do not see this happening in any other EU state. Additionally, I suspect the chaos of the Brexit will serve as a deterrent to not try this in their countries. And I will disagree here with Elhorsto: I do not see how this will strengthen the UK if it falls apart.

Coriolan
29-06-16, 12:22
I am not confused I knew the difference except I think that one is fake too, this is just another way to take advantage from the British people's misfortune and loot from them, making people more confused. This is no different from robbing an unfortunate fire victim. It shows how easy people can hack into systems and create a fake report these days. On the other hand, the 77000 fake signatures can also be a great way to purposefully discredit a petition. Now I am split in my opinion. It can go either way. I should have made myself clearer, I should not post in a hurry next time. 7823

I've just noticed something, (if you take a good look at the right hand side where it says sign this petition)https://www.change.org/p/sadiq-khan-declare-london-independent-from-the-uk-and-apply-to-join-the-eu you can be from anywhere and sign up for this petition. If people from North Korea and Russia or the Middle East whoever Europe's enemy maybe sign this petition what is the difference between this one and the other petition that is fake? On the other hand there can be people who are friends with the British who think they are doing London a favor and signing up but this is not the world's decision, this is the British people's decision.

The online petition and the British government website surely registers IP addresses and keep them for later records so as to know who wants London to split from England. Foreign IP addresses will be discarded for the petition's purpose.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Maleth
29-06-16, 12:37
I'm very sceptical on the prospects of a "domino effect" in other member states. The situation in the UK was unique in so far as that the Cameron administration offered the referendum in the first place - as of the moment I do not see this happening in any other EU state. Additionally, I suspect the chaos of the Brexit will serve as a deterrent to not try this in their countries. And I will disagree here with Elhorsto: I do not see how this will strengthen the UK if it falls apart.

I tend to agree that no one has learned about the EU as much as this event. In my opinion the anti EU sentiments would be on hold if not receded in the short term. England and Wales (Maybe Britain if it stays in union) are going to serve as a sort of pilot project for the future. How it does in the future its going to either trigger a collapse (or partial) of the EU as we know it or even integrated further depending on Britians failure or success. Even that is a broad statement as there are different interpretations of what is failure and what is success, but at the end of the day it will all be about economics. In a few years we are going to have a tried and tested model....the anti and pros will be strengthened or weakened accordingly.

I think everybody is jumping into a quick conclusions. The UK has a sound industrial base with much innovations and ideas. It has provided many good business models and known to have maneuvered around difficult moments on numerous times. It also has (till today) closer ties with ex colonial countries, (such as India) maybe more then any other European country and 'maybe' being out of the EU can help having back direct negotiation lead (rather through the EU institutions). Lets not forget the 'special status' (I don't really know where this came from as its like a kind of USA obsession) US presidents speak about. Its still too early to declare disaster. Its going to be a long process, but in reality not one can predicted with any correctness. Having sad so, even this model will not mean it can be applied to all EU countries. Each case is different.

Minty
29-06-16, 13:21
The online petition and the British government website surely registers IP addresses and keep them for later records so as to know who wants London to split from England. Foreign IP addresses will be discarded for the petition's purpose.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

If they can just do that why for the other petition they found so many frauds?

Voyager
29-06-16, 13:33
I'm very sceptical on the prospects of a "domino effect" in other member states. The situation in the UK was unique in so far as that the Cameron administration offered the referendum in the first place - as of the moment I do not see this happening in any other EU state. Additionally, I suspect the chaos of the Brexit will serve as a deterrent to not try this in their countries. And I will disagree here with Elhorsto: I do not see how this will strengthen the UK if it falls apart.

Anyway, I don't see how the other European Democracy Leaders could spare its own People from a referendum without loosing their credibility and their legitimacy. Cameron as a democracy leader asked his own people only because of that. I don't think you can drive a democracy or any cowntry without the People consent.

Coriolan
29-06-16, 13:57
If they can just do that why for the other petition they found so many frauds?
I would think they found they were fraudulent because of the IP addresses.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Taranis
29-06-16, 14:01
Anyway, I don't see how the other European Democracy Leaders could spare its own People from a referendum without loosing their credibility and their legitimacy. Cameron as a democracy leader asked his own people only because of that. I don't think you can drive a democracy or any cowntry without the People consent.

What incentive (or obligation, for that matter) would the Socialist Party of France have for initiating such a referendum? The situation for Cameron was very different in so far as that for the Tories, the referendum on the UK's withdrawal from the EU was an election promise. In so far, you could say that they were obligated to hold the referendum - even if the re-negotiations with the European Union that the British government made in the preceding months seem quite superfluous now.

In my opinion, short of a Front National victory in the presidential elections next year, I do not see a French exit referendum occuring in the first place, let alone succeeding. Bear in mind that the outcome of the Brexit referendum surprised even its initiators and proponents, and was indeed demographically unlikely.

Minty
29-06-16, 14:03
I would think they found they were fraudulent because of the IP addresses.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

You can get British citizens signing the petition from outside the UK, by using a public computer or a friend's computer.

Coriolan
29-06-16, 14:03
Anyway, I don't see how the other European Democracy Leaders could spare its own People from a referendum without loosing their credibility and their legitimacy. Cameron as a democracy leader asked his own people only because of that. I don't think you can drive a democracy or any cowntry without the People consent.
There are plenty of issues that could be subjected t referendums. However referendums are costly, which is why they are very rare. Switzerland has a longer tradition of holding referendums on key issues, maybe because it can also afford them more easily. But even though they are still exceptional events.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Coriolan
29-06-16, 14:05
You can get British citizens signing the petition from outside the UK, by using a public computer or a friend's computer.
The fraudulent signatures were probably all from the same IP address or a few addresses.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

bicicleur
29-06-16, 14:13
Anyway, I don't see how the other European Democracy Leaders could spare its own People from a referendum without loosing their credibility and their legitimacy. Cameron as a democracy leader asked his own people only because of that. I don't think you can drive a democracy or any cowntry without the People consent.

Cameron was elected, the EU leaders are not.
That being said, referenda are stupid.
Don't overestimate the voters judgement.

Coriolan
29-06-16, 15:58
Cameron was elected, the EU leaders are not.
That being said, referenda are stupid.
Don't overestimate the voters judgement.
Referendums are good for simple issues that affect only people's lifestyle directly without political or economic consequences. It's good to ask if people want to have ID cards or allow gay marriage, but not extremely complex issues with countless ramifications like leaving the EU. Only experts can understand the full economic and social consequences of such a radical change.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Voyager
29-06-16, 18:16
Referendums are good for simple issues that affect only people's lifestyle directly without political or economic consequences. It's good to ask if people want to have ID cards or allow gay marriage, but not extremely complex issues with countless ramifications like leaving the EU. Only experts can understand the full economic and social consequences of such a radical change.


Concerning Economy, most of the people balance their own budget, do business much better than any politics in charge apparently. I believe that any Human being is perfectly able to judge where is his own interest and has real capacities to assess complex situations otherwise our complex society simply won't work with only dumb peoples. A referendum is the right stuff for debatting and explanations through different medias and let people judging by themself. No debate is the demonstration that the political powers in place feared to be wrong, then this is the best demonstration that they are wrong, it's a weakness and a dead end for the power in place. Cameron as a polical Leader kew that perfectly well , so the referendum.

Sile
29-06-16, 20:23
why would any country in the EU listen to another EU country's leader ( Merkel) to dictate the terms of what your country needs?. Merkel is irrational as Putin is............would you let Putin dictate terms to you ? ( you meaning England )

History will eventually show that Merkel has destroyed the foundation of the EU .
The beginning of the end of the EU was when it forced re-vote for the Irish when the Irish went against the EU .............does anyone remember.!

Yetos
29-06-16, 23:35
Referendums are good for simple issues that affect only people's lifestyle directly without political or economic consequences. It's good to ask if people want to have ID cards or allow gay marriage, but not extremely complex issues with countless ramifications like leaving the EU. Only experts can understand the full economic and social consequences of such a radical change.



Referendum is the ultimate act of peoples will,
it is above kings, presidents, prime ministers,
it is the will of people,

referendum is pure democracy,
and democracy is a hard and cruel system.
peoples will is above everything,

THERE IS NO PURE DEMOCRACY, NEITHER A CONSTITUTION CHARTA is well founded or has power, IF NOT APROVED BY REFERENDUM.
although at modern times, some judges or some political parties, try to reject them,

the system of Greece from kingdom to democracy at 1970's was done with a referendum,
even today nobody say something about that, cause was peoples will,
but all say that Greece enter EU or NATO by political actions without asking the people, cause was not peoples will aproved by a referendum.
same to most EU countries,
A referendum is undeniable, and not to be arqued for one generation (about 27 years)
only after a generation can be asked again the same question,
it is not a statistical exit poll neither a life style like or not like,
IT IS THE STRONGEST ACT OF PURE HARD DEMOCRACY,

and although Plato many times spoke about δημοκρατια των αριστων, democracy of excellent people, nobody listen to him,
even at oligarchy of Sparta the apella, and at Makedonian kingdom the gatherings, democratical desicions were always above, even above Gods.
only Alexander dare once not hear, and he was abbandon and humiliated at next battle.

it is the ultimate way to keep your shelf in the 'team', respect your 'team', show your character and your generation, and prove that you are equal or better than your ancestors,
no matter if you are on the winners or on the losers side, the desicion is done, and must be respected,
it shows how descent noble and brave you are to serve the desicion of many,
although that does not mean that you may not have your ideas and speak academically about the oposite,
but you must obey the ultimate law of human society.

in fact politicians as the year before at Greece, many time ridicule the referendum with stupid questions,
but in the clear question that was at UK this time, and the so much media information, I think UK has given a lesson of pure democracy to all the world,

besides experts many times look their own profit, and not citizens profit,
many books were written about this, but Uberto Eco's 'the name of the rose' shows what experts many time think and understand.
and many times I wonder which are the limits of Democracy of excellent(experts) and Dictatorship of excellent(experts)
only rotten societies can not vote correct, and I do not believe UK is one of them. cause corruption and rust of society is an effect of rotten politicians, and I do not think UK is so much rotten,
or it was? that I can not tell, I only believe that UK citizens voice has spoke, and must be respected, instead of calling these people imbeciles,
even if brexit party took 48% we should also worry, cause 48% imbeciles means the world is turning in to stupidity,
and modern way of life creates HOMO IMBECILUS, instead of extra sapiens if we follow the principle that the ones who do not hear 'experts' are impecilles',
and their vote is just a crup. not to be taken serious.

Minty
30-06-16, 02:10
The fraudulent signatures were probably all from the same IP address or a few addresses.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Apparently, petitioning Mayor of London Sadiq Khan to declare London independent from the UK and apply to join the EU can be signed by people all over the world, if you take a look at the right hand side of the website, you can even choose which country you are from. There is no where on the website that says you need to indicate you are British citizen or not. Then there is a section where you can say why you are signing this petition, but that is optional. You can even tick the option whether you want to share this with your friends on facebook. Hence, this petition is not valid!

Coriolan
30-06-16, 08:05
Referendum is the ultimate act of peoples will,
it is above kings, presidents, prime ministers,
it is the will of people,

referendum is pure democracy,
and democracy is a hard and cruel system.
peoples will is above everything,

THERE IS NO PURE DEMOCRACY, NEITHER A CONSTITUTION CHARTA is well founded or has power, IF NOT APROVED BY REFERENDUM.
although at modern times, some judges or some political parties, try to reject them,

the system of Greece from kingdom to democracy at 1970's was done with a referendum,
even today nobody say something about that, cause was peoples will,
but all say that Greece enter EU or NATO by political actions without asking the people, cause was not peoples will aproved by a referendum.
same to most EU countries,
A referendum is undeniable, and not to be arqued for one generation (about 27 years)
only after a generation can be asked again the same question,
it is not a statistical exit poll neither a life style like or not like,
IT IS THE STRONGEST ACT OF PURE HARD DEMOCRACY,

and although Plato many times spoke about δημοκρατια των αριστων, democracy of excellent people, nobody listen to him,
even at oligarchy of Sparta the apella, and at Makedonian kingdom the gatherings, democratical desicions were always above, even above Gods.
only Alexander dare once not hear, and he was abbandon and humiliated at next battle.

it is the ultimate way to keep your shelf in the 'team', respect your 'team', show your character and your generation, and prove that you are equal or better than your ancestors,
no matter if you are on the winners or on the losers side, the desicion is done, and must be respected,
it shows how descent noble and brave you are to serve the desicion of many,
although that does not mean that you may not have your ideas and speak academically about the oposite,
but you must obey the ultimate law of human society.

in fact politicians as the year before at Greece, many time ridicule the referendum with stupid questions,
but in the clear question that was at UK this time, and the so much media information, I think UK has given a lesson of pure democracy to all the world,

besides experts many times look their own profit, and not citizens profit,
many books were written about this, but Uberto Eco's 'the name of the rose' shows what experts many time think and understand.
and many times I wonder which are the limits of Democracy of excellent(experts) and Dictatorship of excellent(experts)
only rotten societies can not vote correct, and I do not believe UK is one of them. cause corruption and rust of society is an effect of rotten politicians, and I do not think UK is so much rotten,
or it was? that I can not tell, I only believe that UK citizens voice has spoke, and must be respected, instead of calling these people imbeciles,
even if brexit party took 48% we should also worry, cause 48% imbeciles means the world is turning in to stupidity,
and modern way of life creates HOMO IMBECILUS, instead of extra sapiens if we follow the principle that the ones who do not hear 'experts' are impecilles',
and their vote is just a crup. not to be taken serious.

Many Swiss people have thought or discussed about the idea of direct democracy or pure democracy. It is a concept that many people hold dear but in limitation. If a country decided to replace parliaments by pure democracy by holding referendums every day online for every political issue, using an official ID card to prevent fraudulent votes, that country would quickly fall into chaos. It would be like letting children or a bunch of monkeys taking the reins of the country. Many politicians are unknowledgeable but in many efficiently run countries they have teams of experts to advise them.

I don't think that abortion would have been legalized in any country if medical experts had not first said that it was safe until the 3rd month of pregnancy. Without experts people follow religions and traditions and social progress cannot happen.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

ElHorsto
01-07-16, 15:46
Indeed, more French and German dominance of the EU is to be expected, as the British counterweight has gone.
This could stimulate the desire for the exit of other member states.

That's right, although on the other side it also stimulates the tightening of the residual EU regime, which might strengthen EU in the short term. In any case both scenarios will not encourage approximation between EU nations. Probably in the very long term this will end badly for the EU, or EU will eventually consist of two or three big member states with one single strong government. Meanwhile I think that Britain will be finally better off than the EU in the long term, depending on what remains and what is worth to be called "EU".
After Britain, today the EU was downgraded by S&P.

Yetos
02-07-16, 00:01
damn it kicks me off,
I can write a full text.

Maleth
02-07-16, 00:14
That's right, although on the other side it also stimulates the tightening of the residual EU regime, which might strengthen EU in the short term. In any case both scenarios will not encourage approximation between EU nations. Probably in the very long term this will end badly for the EU, or EU will eventually consist of two or three big member states with one single strong government. Meanwhile I think that Britain will be finally better off than the EU in the long term, depending on what remains and what is worth to be called "EU".
After Britain, today the EU was downgraded by S&P.

The rerunning of elections in Austria will now serve as a barometer to were things are heading. If Norbert Hoffer manages to win with a clear mandate after the brexit experience then the real trouble is going to start.

Yetos
02-07-16, 00:22
Many Swiss people have thought or discussed about the idea of direct democracy or pure democracy. It is a concept that many people hold dear but in limitation. If a country decided to replace parliaments by pure democracy by holding referendums every day online for every political issue, using an official ID card to prevent fraudulent votes, that country would quickly fall into chaos. It would be like letting children or a bunch of monkeys taking the reins of the country. Many politicians are unknowledgeable but in many efficiently run countries they have teams of experts to advise them.

I don't think that abortion would have been legalized in any country if medical experts had not first said that it was safe until the 3rd month of pregnancy. Without experts people follow religions and traditions and social progress cannot happen.


what expert on abortion?

abortion was known from antique, remember silphium?

It was Lenin who first legalize it to show women that is with them, and welcome them to commustic ideas
It needed 53 years to reach USA and Texas to pass as law the 3 trimesters
1 the woman's choice
2 the doctors choice, (possibly lethal pregnacy)
3 not legal cause kills a formed human being,

Abortion is a diplomacy of judges and law to suit both womn's rights and religion-state,
at medieval times how many women choose abortion in order to avoid an unwanted pregnacy, for example from rape etc etc

ABORTION LEGALIZED AS THE FIRST DEMAND of women sufrage movements at USSR and much later at USA,
It was the legalization of abortion that started a new industry of family sex/reproduction programming and created the experts, not the oposite
and do you remember the 'experts' that suggested the spiaral-coil or the diaphragm, how many women suffered from those 'experts'?
at 1900 the experts suggested mercury for curing syphilis, no matter the reactions of mercury, today experts do they also suggest such?
so
EXPERTS OF BREXIT TOMOROW MIGHT BE CONSIDERED AS WISE ONES, OR AS CLOWNS according the results,
don't rush to make them experts, most of them are just 'golden boys', parrots of another one voice-will
the experts suggested to use even planes to spread the DDT, with a huge enviromental disaster, found even at polar bears milk, which might even pass to humans,
Today is Forbiden, so do you believe that the experts of 1950's can be considered today as experts?
come on, just Golden boys with high publicity that suggest the easy way solution.

besides who expert is correct at a dilemma? the Yes one or the No one?
they are both experts.

I do not know about Swiss and referendums, but I know that in Denmark and Iceland are often, at least much often than in my country,

PS
If Swiss is about a referendum of joining EU for example,
Do you believe that you will not find experts that say no? or experts that say Yes?
so who is the expert then? The YES one? or the NO one?
then comes your power, your opinion-vote. the referendum,

PS2
expert = the one who is experienced with a working prosses, a model, a know how,
Do we have experience with a country leaving the EU? NO
then we have no experts, only modern Sibyllas or Cassandras etc etc.
since we have no experience, all these are just like modern prophets
It is like the court of Troy when show Myceneans outside the city.
No one is expert, but all want to say something for publicity, and some like to be prophets,or prognosticators, or clairvoyants to get the glory tomorrow

Angela
02-07-16, 00:39
Who knows what the future will bring, but I just heard something to the effect that our stock market has recouped all of the Brexit "losses".

This just underscores how much of all of this is hysteria. An extraordinary decision, in my opinion, to re-run an entire presidential election. Were the postal votes enough in number to change the ultimate results? It was about 30,000 votes in total, right, that separated the two candidates?

ElHorsto
02-07-16, 02:07
Jens Stoltenberg: After Brexit, NATO is Moving Closer to the EU (http://europe.newsweek.com/nato-jens-stoltenberg-european-union-brexit-475825?rm=eu)

NATO Chief Sees Unifying Role as Brexit Shakes Allies (http://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-chief-sees-unifying-role-as-brexit-shakes-allies-1466783556)

Britain happens to be a NATO core member.

Dinarid
02-07-16, 08:10
I think it will happen. Juncker and friends have made quite clear that because Britain voted to leave, they want them out. He said there would be no hurried second referendum etc. "Out is out". It's sad this is what the EU has become. An Islamophile, fascist mess.

Maleth
02-07-16, 09:04
Who knows what the future will bring, but I just heard something to the effect that our stock market has recouped all of the Brexit "losses".

This just underscores how much of all of this is hysteria.

The stock market depends solely on the mood of the shareholders buyers and sellers and the kind of confidence they show at one particular time. Nothing has really changed economically in Britain (as yet), so the stock markets and just indication of moods and not tangible Economic results. We will have these tangible results in the months to come (after three months we would have the first indications, but it will be yet a longer journey) and the trend they will produce. That would all depend on commodity prices, investment in the country, the strength of the labor market and so on. To have a correct picture we are going to have to wait a minimum of two years when Britain officially pulls out completely from the EU with whatever package they would manage to obtain.

If over this period Britain remains economically sound as at present....then that is bad news for the EU (there will be an ongoing pressure for some countries to pull out)
If Britain performs Better then present........................................... .then its very bad news for the EU (and we see a number of countries pulling out)
If Britain Economy goes backward.......................................... ........some anti EU sentiments will halt and maybe recede.





An extraordinary decision, in my opinion, to re-run an entire presidential election. Were the postal votes enough in number to change the ultimate results? It was about 30,000 votes in total, right, that separated the two candidates?

yes the difference was less then 1%. This will be a barometer in the short term. If Norbert Hoffer wins the election even with a small majority then we are seeing an on going steady momentum towards the dismantling of the EU. I will say no more.....I believe the saying 'history repeats itself' holds incredibly true.:thinking:...........

bicicleur
02-07-16, 09:45
The stock market depends solely on the mood of the shareholders buyers and sellers and the kind of confidence they show at one particular time. Nothing has really changed economically in Britain (as yet), so the stock markets and just indication of moods and not tangible Economic results. We will have these tangible results in the months to come (after three months we would have the first indications, but it will be yet a longer journey) and the trend they will produce. That would all depend on commodity prices, investment in the country, the strength of the labor market and so on. To have a correct picture we are going to have to wait a minimum of two years when Britain officially pulls out completely from the EU with whatever package they would manage to obtain.

If over this period Britain remains economically sound as at present....then that is bad news for the EU (there will be an ongoing pressure for some countries to pull out)
If Britain performs Better then present........................................... .then its very bad news for the EU (and we see a number of countries pulling out)
If Britain Economy goes backward.......................................... ........some anti EU sentiments will halt and maybe recede.






yes the difference was less then 1%. This will be a barometer in the short term. If Norbert Hoffer wins the election even with a small majority then we are seeing an on going steady momentum towards the dismantling of the EU. I will say no more.....I believe the saying 'history repeats itself' holds incredibly true.:thinking:...........

the US stock market fully recovered, European didn't, and the Euro and British pound dropped
and indeed stock markets are very nervous and tend to overreact
but these are signs not to be neglected
furthermore the UK and the EU both have been downgraded, I beleive it was by S&P

Brexit is not the biggest problem, it is a symptom
the EU should be a fantastic project, but it isn't because much of its potential is squandered by mismanagement and politicians who are not held accountable and look only at their own carreer/pension and interests
if EU government doesn't change its course more accidents will happen

Taranis
02-07-16, 16:06
the US stock market fully recovered, European didn't, and the Euro and British pound dropped
and indeed stock markets are very nervous and tend to overreact
but these are signs not to be neglected
furthermore the UK and the EU both have been downgraded, I beleive it was by S&P

Brexit is not the biggest problem, it is a symptom
the EU should be a fantastic project, but it isn't because much of its potential is squandered by mismanagement and politicians who are not held accountable and look only at their own carreer/pension and interests
if EU government doesn't change its course more accidents will happen

I think as long as Britain keeps hanging 'in limbo', and the situation is unresolved one way or another, this economic damage (for both sides) is permanent. This is one of the key reasons why the EU has been so decisive about starting exit negotiations as quickly as possible. If and when Brexit happens after all, my suspicion is that it will harm Britain more than it does the EU, especially because the "vision" of the pro-Brexit crowd for Britain is essentially one of a narrow-minded country that wishes to isolate itself from the rest of the world. Being outside of the EU will not make Britain be a more attractive place to make business, certainly not for the anglophone countries / Britain's former colonies - their main incentive was that Britain was in the EU. I do not think that people from the Commonwealth will be any more welcome in the UK if citizens from other EU countries are not. A Norwegian/Swiss-style trade deal with the EU seems also unlikely, even if this would alleviate many of Britain's problems, mainly because it would defeat the purpose of leaving the EU in the first place: this would mean adhering to basically all obligations of the EU with respect for free travel without being actually part of the EU. Another aspect I see: Britain as a place for science will receive a massive blow - the UK has profited immensely from EU research funds, and these will go away. My suspicion is that British academia will "crash and burn" like the NHS. The same applies for agricultural business that profits from EU subventions while the UK is still in the EU. In summary, I do not see a way how Britain will come out in any way as superior in this - and all of this analysis does not account for the possibility that the UK falls apart, which, I think, is a very grave danger at this point, and one issue where I genuinely blame both the adherents of the pro-exit camp and the pro-remain camp is that they did not warn about these dangers enough.


Cameron was elected, the EU leaders are not.
That being said, referenda are stupid.
Don't overestimate the voters judgement.


If the EU leaders are not democratically elected, for what purpose did I participate two years ago in the European Parliament elections? For what purpose did I participate in the German federal election in 2013? You may not like Angela Merkel (I wouldn't blame you there if you did), but she's the elected head of government of Germany, and therefore she's an elected member of the European Council.

Maleth
02-07-16, 16:36
I genuinely blame both the adherents of the pro-exit camp and the pro-remain camp is that they did not warn about these dangers enough.

I believe that there has been lots of warnings but a huge section of the populations have deaf ears for the warnings and follow people that tell them otherwise giving an outlook of certainty and reassurance, and managed to process in their minds that all warnings is scaremongering garbage and tricks how to take people for a ride.

The Buzz words are:-
anti establishment (what is the definition of establishment?)
Politically correct (what does it mean not be Politically correct?)

Mix immigration and terrorist attacks which would naturally amplify Nationalistic sentiments and voila - you get the perfect bomb

Cornwall that has received much EU aid in return to the ailing Fishing industry have voted to Leave. But now are already claiming For the British Government to match the aid received from the EU.

Yetos
02-07-16, 19:42
If the EU leaders are not democratically elected, for what purpose did I participate two years ago in the European Parliament elections? For what purpose did I participate in the German federal election in 2013? You may not like Angela Merkel (I wouldn't blame you there if you did), but she's the elected head of government of Germany, and therefore she's an elected member of the European Council.

there are places at EU were the occupiers are not elected,
if remember correct place like Barozo or Van Rompuy and some others are not elected,

Melcombe
03-07-16, 02:22
I think as long as Britain keeps hanging 'in limbo', and the situation is unresolved one way or another, this economic damage (for both sides) is permanent. This is one of the key reasons why the EU has been so decisive about starting exit negotiations as quickly as possible. If and when Brexit happens after all, my suspicion is that it will harm Britain more than it does the EU, especially because the "vision" of the pro-Brexit crowd for Britain is essentially one of a narrow-minded country that wishes to isolate itself from the rest of the world. Being outside of the EU will not make Britain be a more attractive place to make business, certainly not for the anglophone countries / Britain's former colonies - their main incentive was that Britain was in the EU. I do not think that people from the Commonwealth will be any more welcome in the UK if citizens from other EU countries are not. A Norwegian/Swiss-style trade deal with the EU seems also unlikely, even if this would alleviate many of Britain's problems, mainly because it would defeat the purpose of leaving the EU in the first place: this would mean adhering to basically all obligations of the EU with respect for free travel without being actually part of the EU. Another aspect I see: Britain as a place for science will receive a massive blow - the UK has profited immensely from EU research funds, and these will go away. My suspicion is that British academia will "crash and burn" like the NHS. The same applies for agricultural business that profits from EU subventions while the UK is still in the EU. In summary, I do not see a way how Britain will come out in any way as superior in this - and all of this analysis does not account for the possibility that the UK falls apart, which, I think, is a very grave danger at this point, and one issue where I genuinely blame both the adherents of the pro-exit camp and the pro-remain camp is that they did not warn about these dangers enough.




If the EU leaders are not democratically elected, for what purpose did I participate two years ago in the European Parliament elections? For what purpose did I participate in the German federal election in 2013? You may not like Angela Merkel (I wouldn't blame you there if you did), but she's the elected head of government of Germany, and therefore she's an elected member of the European Council.

Your observations are very insightful.

I cannot emphasise too much how shocking the result has been to most people in the UK - it was very unexpected. Those voting to leave were mainly older, poorer and less skilled workers. Their votes have condemned the country to economic decline and will, ironically adversely affect those groups the most. For the most part the "complaint" of those voting to leave, was immigration - despite the fact that EU membership is largely irrelevant to the type of immigration mostly complained about.

For my part I feel bereaved - I have had my country stolen from me by a small margin of an ill-informed vote.

I have however been heartened by the very wide spectrum of people supporting and campaigning for a reversal the decision. Implementation of Article 50 is not a foregone conclusion (referenda have no status in the UK constitution - only Parliament can decide the matter) and, even if it is triggered, it is very possible that during the 2 year exit period there will be an election following which a new government would not feel bound by it. If that were to happen there would be no obligation on the EU to halt the process of departure, but it remains a real hope.

The divisions in British society caused by this issue are very deep indeed. No serious business commentator suggests that the UK would do well in the world market - and most rightly expect the country to do very significantly worse. My own view is that the economic arguments are broadly irrelevant - the European project was built on the foundations of reconciliation after 2 catastrophic European wars in the 20th Century caused by the growth of nationalism in the 19th. To give up on the creation of the worlds first non-nationalist state as a guarantee of peace and security is to betray the sacrifices of millions of Europeans who died in those terrible conflicts.

Please do not think that the result of the vote is representative of the heart of the UK - for most people here under 50, Europe remains our destiny. Current events are a tragedy in the making and a huge self-inflicted wound. Please help us.

David

LeBrok
03-07-16, 08:43
Your observations are very insightful.

I cannot emphasise too much how shocking the result has been to most people in the UK - it was very unexpected. Those voting to leave were mainly older, poorer and less skilled workers. Their votes have condemned the country to economic decline and will, ironically adversely affect those groups the most. For the most part the "complaint" of those voting to leave, was immigration - despite the fact that EU membership is largely irrelevant to the type of immigration mostly complained about.

For my part I feel bereaved - I have had my country stolen from me by a small margin of an ill-informed vote.

I have however been heartened by the very wide spectrum of people supporting and campaigning for a reversal the decision. Implementation of Article 50 is not a foregone conclusion (referenda have no status in the UK constitution - only Parliament can decide the matter) and, even if it is triggered, it is very possible that during the 2 year exit period there will be an election following which a new government would not feel bound by it. If that were to happen there would be no obligation on the EU to halt the process of departure, but it remains a real hope.

The divisions in British society caused by this issue are very deep indeed. No serious business commentator suggests that the UK would do well in the world market - and most rightly expect the country to do very significantly worse. My own view is that the economic arguments are broadly irrelevant - the European project was built on the foundations of reconciliation after 2 catastrophic European wars in the 20th Century caused by the growth of nationalism in the 19th. To give up on the creation of the worlds first non-nationalist state as a guarantee of peace and security is to betray the sacrifices of millions of Europeans who died in those terrible conflicts.

Please do not think that the result of the vote is representative of the heart of the UK - for most people here under 50, Europe remains our destiny. Current events are a tragedy in the making and a huge self-inflicted wound. Please help us.

David
Great post David, welcome to Eupedia.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 15:17
No offense to British, but as an American from the South, I am thinking that this Brexit may have actually been a bad idea. I am more right-wing than left. But leaving the EU seems like a total disaster.

I can understand the British and their want to keep immigration down or their dissatisfaction withthe EU. But still, if they do not collaborate with the EU; as well as potential threats like Russia, there may very-well be a risk that the downfall can become quite disastrous. Economically, internationally and socially.

(Just if anyone wanted this Southerners' opinion.) The UK separating from the EU seems to carry potential hazard...I was originally thinking it would have been a good idea, but I suddenly realize that it may hurt UK and even the rest of the EU. This leaves only my country (the USA, as well as Canada) to cover UK while leaving Europe hung out to dry. It makes us also more vulnerable to get into a potential conflict with Russia, and that doesn't seem like a good thing.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 15:22
While on the subject ... I may hold some very unpopular and maverick political views. It may be a little too late to gripe. But I would much rather candidate Bernie Sanders (D) as the Democratic nominee. Hillary Clinton just doesn't seem to have the ability to manage to Russia and help both nations compromise more effectively. But, Donald Trump (R) himself isn't one of the best out there either.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 15:34
Your observations are very insightful.

I cannot emphasise too much how shocking the result has been to most people in the UK - it was very unexpected. Those voting to leave were mainly older, poorer and less skilled workers. Their votes have condemned the country to economic decline and will, ironically adversely affect those groups the most. For the most part the "complaint" of those voting to leave, was immigration - despite the fact that EU membership is largely irrelevant to the type of immigration mostly complained about.

For my part I feel bereaved - I have had my country stolen from me by a small margin of an ill-informed vote.

I have however been heartened by the very wide spectrum of people supporting and campaigning for a reversal the decision. Implementation of Article 50 is not a foregone conclusion (referenda have no status in the UK constitution - only Parliament can decide the matter) and, even if it is triggered, it is very possible that during the 2 year exit period there will be an election following which a new government would not feel bound by it. If that were to happen there would be no obligation on the EU to halt the process of departure, but it remains a real hope.

The divisions in British society caused by this issue are very deep indeed. No serious business commentator suggests that the UK would do well in the world market - and most rightly expect the country to do very significantly worse. My own view is that the economic arguments are broadly irrelevant - the European project was built on the foundations of reconciliation after 2 catastrophic European wars in the 20th Century caused by the growth of nationalism in the 19th. To give up on the creation of the worlds first non-nationalist state as a guarantee of peace and security is to betray the sacrifices of millions of Europeans who died in those terrible conflicts.

Please do not think that the result of the vote is representative of the heart of the UK - for most people here under 50, Europe remains our destiny. Current events are a tragedy in the making and a huge self-inflicted wound. Please help us.

DavidI couldn't agree more. A lot of the European economy seems to be dependent on Russia for a few resources as well. And if the USA chooses to back the UK more and not EU countries, then there could be an international fight over resources. And this could bankrupt us all involved (North America, Britain, Europe and Russia together.) This Brexit was like stabbing Europe in the back. I feel a lot of people will feel resentful and disgruntled to England for this dire decision. The Irish are already bickering; and it seems the Scottish are pondering on another independence referendum. Wales voting to leave (as well as with England), was a shock to me. What is worse, is that I think this will make the Irish resurrect a grudge against the British.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 15:51
I think it will happen. Juncker and friends have made quite clear that because Britain voted to leave, they want them out. He said there would be no hurried second referendum etc. "Out is out". It's sad this is what the EU has become. An Islamophile, fascist mess.No. Same old Croatian spouting hatred and hypocrisy... People like you are what lead Brexit to exist. Because a large percentage of neo-Fascists voted for it, evidently. (UKIP + National Front). Take your nationalist crap elsewhere. You already helped Yugoslavia to break and now are spewing hatred for your Bosniak buddies? What more do you want? And tell me then, who is the real "Fascist" now?

nordicwarrior
08-07-16, 15:58
Relax folks, Brexit was the better option.

And as an American, I feel pity for Putin if he thinks Germany or the UK are now in play in any way.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 16:10
I think that UK is the first casualty of European Federalism. Migrants Problem is just a side argument. The main argument is the feeling that Bruxelles want to decide for the European Peoples, I heard this argument quite often from Brexit peoples. Euro money leads us to a Federalism system at the end. Federalism is much more coercive than a simple commercial Union of free nations. The European Peoples view it more as a trap. Next, Frexit is getting likely IMO.As long as Russia isn't domineering; then leaving the EU would probably be a better idea -- but Russia seems like they are not going to let go. They want the EU to be dependent on them. This is the disturbing thing about this election turnout (Brexet) in my opinion. Losing a big country like the UK is a very big blow. If you think of the EU in terms of analogy or at face value; it is almost like the USA losing California or Texas. It is almost as bad or dangerous as risking civil war. Which is why I think England leaving wasn't a good idea. Britain being there is helping to patch up the economy. And who knows what Russia has in store; if they decide to take advantage of the situation. Now the Russians are happier that Britain is out of the EU, because they have a better control, or better chance of succeeding and/or exploiting their own economy and Europe's economy, in Russia's hands.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 16:16
Relax folks, Brexit was the better option.

And as an American, I feel pity for Putin if he thinks Germany or the UK are now in play in any way.You're naive my friend. Russia wants to see Brexit because it weakens Europe and the West. And makes Europe (EU) more dependent on Russian resources. Thereby, enriching and empowering Russia more; and Europe even less. Russia now has the strong-hand. Britain and the West do not. And UK going independent holds a real consequence of collapsing internally..

Vallicanus
08-07-16, 16:19
Your observations are very insightful.I cannot emphasise too much how shocking the result has been to most people in the UK - it was very unexpected. Those voting to leave were mainly older, poorer and less skilled workers. Their votes have condemned the country to economic decline and will, ironically adversely affect those groups the most. For the most part the "complaint" of those voting to leave, was immigration - despite the fact that EU membership is largely irrelevant to the type of immigration mostly complained about.For my part I feel bereaved - I have had my country stolen from me by a small margin of an ill-informed vote. I have however been heartened by the very wide spectrum of people supporting and campaigning for a reversal the decision. Implementation of Article 50 is not a foregone conclusion (referenda have no status in the UK constitution - only Parliament can decide the matter) and, even if it is triggered, it is very possible that during the 2 year exit period there will be an election following which a new government would not feel bound by it. If that were to happen there would be no obligation on the EU to halt the process of departure, but it remains a real hope.The divisions in British society caused by this issue are very deep indeed. No serious business commentator suggests that the UK would do well in the world market - and most rightly expect the country to do very significantly worse. My own view is that the economic arguments are broadly irrelevant - the European project was built on the foundations of reconciliation after 2 catastrophic European wars in the 20th Century caused by the growth of nationalism in the 19th. To give up on the creation of the worlds first non-nationalist state as a guarantee of peace and security is to betray the sacrifices of millions of Europeans who died in those terrible conflicts.Please do not think that the result of the vote is representative of the heart of the UK - for most people here under 50, Europe remains our destiny. Current events are a tragedy in the making and a huge self-inflicted wound. Please help us.David


Every word is true.
There is also a rise in English racism against Polish migrants and long established Muslim families.

Vallicanus
08-07-16, 16:37
The pound sterling has lost over 10pc against the US dollar and the euro since the referendum and shoppers are saving rather than spending because Britain will not even chose the next prime minister till September 9th.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 16:37
I feel pity for Putin if he thinks Germany or the UK are now in play in any way.

Have you been watching the news? Whom do you think Europe is getting their international resources from? Especially Germany? It's Russia, not us. Why do you think America has tried to impose sanctions on Russia? Russia are going to take advantage of this situation. Brexit, It is total bad news for the West.

Britain left the EU and the rest of Europe out to dry. Their (EU) only option now is selling out to Russia and blocking trade from North America. They will become more dominant on Russia and the Middle East. Same as Israel. As an American, you are not aware of that? The global economy is now in the hands of Russia, and no longer the West. Think about it - This situation with Brexit totally has disastrous consequence.

Maleth
08-07-16, 16:38
Both Putin and Trump want to see the EU dismantled and obviously would back far right parties within EU to help the process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiWE5frLjZQ

One would have expected two forerunners such as Boris Kemal (Johnson) and Nigel Farage to show leadership and come up with plans and maybe a road map of how Britain is going to do well outside the EU.....what they have been preaching all the way. But what happened? One said he want his life back! and dissapeared... and other felt he is not competent to be prime minster and disappeared...no plans no strategies..... for only to have a pro EU candidate as a favorite to become Britain's next prime minister AND face the mess, while Nigel Farage will be receiving now even a pension from the EU institution he insulted for 12 years.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 16:47
Both Putin and Trump want to see the EU dismantled and obviously would back far right parties within EU to help the process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiWE5frLjZQ

One would have expected two forerunners such as Boris Kemal (Johnson) and Nigel Farage to show leadership and come up with plans and maybe a road map of how Britain is going to do well outside the EU.....what they have been preaching all the way. But what happened? One said he want his life back! and other felt he is not competent to be prime minster,no plans no strategies..... for only to have a pro EU candidate as a favorite to become prime minister AND face the mess.Well ironically, Trump may be the only hope for the Western world now. If you realize that or not. Unfortunately even if he is against the EU. He and Putin will have to compromise and make a deal. Two world superpowers.

I think this is such a ridiculous situation. And only half of Britain determined our futures.

Maleth
08-07-16, 18:30
Well ironically, Trump may be the only hope for the Western world now. If you realize that or not. Unfortunately even if he is against the EU. He and Putin will have to compromise and make a deal. Two world superpowers.

:confused2::grin:. How is that possible? Any hints? I am open to any rational instances that can maybe help me see some positive aspects in a Trump presidency. So far it has been the simple chorus of immigration, getting the country back, so and so forth. The kind of talk that plays sweet music to a section of the population psyche ...(just to be diplomatically correct). But is it really wise to stop there and cheer?

On the other hand no one is (example) explaining how he will start manufacturing the T-shirts he produces in Turkey (because of cheaper labor) back to America and all the other products he produce in much cheaper labor countries. What kind of wages would he proposing to be competitive? especially with a country that has one of the highest wages world wide? People need to start asking these questions before getting high on Making America great type of buzz words. We know the Britts fell for it, but no one is saying how the standard of living is at the least going to remain the same, without any repercussions such as job losses lower wages and more expensive commodities.

I dont know.....maybe Norbert Hofer or Marine Le Pan will be presenting some kind of model?

Korbyn
08-07-16, 19:23
You are naive to think an American President like Trump would have any intervention with the EU or want to destroy it. It is not even his business...should it not be obvious? Same thing with Hillary Clinton... The EU is in control of itself, it's own destiny; not the USA.

You misunderstood my post; the person you should be worrying about is Putin not Trump...

Maleth
08-07-16, 20:26
You are naive to think an American President like Trump would have any intervention with the EU or want to destroy it. It is not even his business...should it not be obvious? Same thing with Hillary Clinton... The EU is in control of itself, it's own destiny; not the USA...

Well I am not sure if you watched the video I posted. He traveled day after referendum to Scotland (who voted over 60% to remain in EU) but complimented the Brits in general for leaving saying its a good good thing for taking control. (would he not wish other countries the same?) Why would you think I am naive for thinking that Trump supports a fractured EU? Isnt it obvious enough? and why would you think he is not interested in EU affairs if he mentioned it in his speech with SUCH prominence.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 14:33
Well I am not sure if you watched the video I posted. He traveled day after referendum to Scotland (who voted over 60% to remain in EU) but complimented the Brits in general for leaving saying its a good good thing for taking control. (would he not wish other countries the same?) Why would you think I am naive for thinking that Trump supports a fractured EU? Isnt it obvious enough? and why would you think he is not interested in EU affairs if he mentioned it in his speech with SUCH prominence.You should calm down. Trump has no power over the EU. As I said, it's the EU (and the European peoples') decision. And I am usually a right-wing voter myself, although I don't like Trump very much..but I have stated here quite clearly why I think leaving the EU was a bad decision. So, take whatever you can.. and learn from it.

ElHorsto
09-07-16, 19:36
As I predicted, Brexit is widely used as a scapegoat for the cracks in world economy (new banking crisis in Europe, currency devaluations), distracting from the central banks failures. If world economy were sound, Brexit wouldn't cause any significant damage. Brexit is merely a tiny catalyst. Before the full economic situation is exhibited, a "surprising incident (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident)" will happen.
I didn't expect though that some people (Cameron, media) have the guts to blame the british referendum result on Putin(TM), even though there is not one single evidence that Putin hates EU (even though considering what EU did in Ukraine, it wouldn't be surprising).
This is how the blame game works: we are always right. If not, then it was because of Emmanuel Goldstein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Goldstein).

Korbyn
09-07-16, 23:17
As I predicted, Brexit is widely used as a scapegoat for the cracks in world economy (new banking crisis in Europe, currency devaluations), distracting from the central banks failures. If world economy were sound, Brexit wouldn't cause any significant damage. Brexit is merely a tiny catalyst. Before the full economic situation is exhibited, a "surprising incident (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident)" will happen.
I didn't expect though that some people (Cameron, media) have the guts to blame the british referendum result on Putin(TM), even though there is not one single evidence that Putin hates EU (even though considering what EU did in Ukraine, it wouldn't be surprising).
This is how the blame game works: we are always right. If not, then it was because of Emmanuel Goldstein (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Goldstein).Who is supplying Europe with your oil? It is not us Americans. Hold on, think for a second. If Russia is crushed, what is going to happen to the EU? And especially if the UK proves themselves to be more successful without the EU...

Maleth
12-07-16, 18:40
You should calm down. Trump has no power over the EU. As I said, it's the EU (and the European peoples') decision. And I am usually a right-wing voter myself, although I don't like Trump very much..but I have stated here quite clearly why I think leaving the EU was a bad decision. So, take whatever you can.. and learn from it.

Well you heard what Trump had to say in Scotland. Its a good good thing (Brexit). - if anyone does not understand that, I don't have much more to say.

LABERIA
12-07-16, 20:13
Well you heard what Trump had to say in Scotland. Its a good good thing (Brexit). - if anyone does not understand that, I don't have much more to say.

Yes, he said this the next day after the referendum.

bicicleur
12-07-16, 23:22
Well you heard what Trump had to say in Scotland. Its a good good thing (Brexit). - if anyone does not understand that, I don't have much more to say.

are you chocked? did he have no right to do so?
I know of 1 major American politician who toke side before the poll.
Even Putin could restrain from that.

Maleth
13-07-16, 13:10
are you chocked? did he have no right to do so?
I know of 1 major American politician who toke side before the poll.
Even Putin could restrain from that.

Not really shocked and that is totally besides the point anyway. The point is its very silly for anyone to say Trump does not care about EU and does not have anti EU sentiment with such comments. Is it difficult to understand?

Wanderlust
13-07-16, 18:15
Not really shocked and that is totally besides the point anyway. The point is its very silly for anyone to say Trump does not care about EU and does not have anti EU sentiment with such comments. Is it difficult to understand?

I generally agree with you but one can't forget that as an individual, Trump is a blustering, uninformed idiot and flip flopping opportunist. Not only does he generally lack a complete and total understanding of the most important issues facing the world, but he also changes his stances and opinions depending on the room he's in--with people like this, it's hard to ever truly know what they actually support or do not support.

When he was in Scotland, he didn't intentionally support Britain's decision to leave the EU, knowing that Scotland voted to remain. In true Trump fashion, he didn't know that Scotland voted to remain and was merely speaking out of his ass, as he is wont to do. He tweeted this the day after the referendum: "Just arrived in Scotland. Place is going wild over the vote. They took their country back, just like we will take America back. No games!" He's simply fed right-wing talking points by his handlers and he repeats them like a less intelligent Mynah bird--usually, his handlers point him in the right direction and set him loose but this time, someone messed up (most likely Trump himself).

And again, aside from his idiocy, he is a professional flip flopper. This is Trump in 2013, speaking on the need for European/International economic interdependence: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/22/business/opinion-donald-trump-europe/



"The near meltdown we experienced a few years ago made it clear that our economic health depended on dependence on each other to do the right thing.


We are now closer to having an economic community in the best sense of the term -- we work with each other for the benefit of all.


I think we've all become aware of the fact that our cultures and economics are intertwined... It's a time for working together for the best of all involved. Never before has the phrase "we're all in this together" had more resonance or relevance."


"We will have to leave borders behind and go for global unity when it comes to financial stability...


Europe is a tapestry that is dense, colorful and deserving of continued longevity and prosperity. There are many pieces that must be carefully fitted together in order to thrive.


Our challenge is to acknowledge those pieces and to see how they can form a whole that works together well without losing any cultural flavor in the process. It's a combination of preservation along with forward thinking."


Does that sound like someone who'd support Britain leaving the EU? lol He is a joke. I do agree that, now, he seems to hold nativist, anti-EU views but my overall point is that we can't be sure that he authentically holds these views or if this is just another bout of political expediency. His past comments tend to support the latter. But who knows when he will next alter his position.

nordicwarrior
16-07-16, 15:42
Wanderlust, I don't agree with much of what you've said here-- but you are well-spoken, thoughtful and intelligent.

All that being said-- you are not yet wise.

arvistro
20-07-16, 11:05
Dramatic impact on UK economy:
http://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EFTSE/news

http://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EFTSE/news

Look at that drop in 27th of June!!!

bicicleur
20-07-16, 12:18
Dramatic impact on UK economy:
http://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EFTSE/news

http://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EFTSE/news

Look at that drop in 27th of June!!!

yes, but on the other hand, look here :

http://finance.yahoo.com/chart/GBPUSD%3DX

arvistro
20-07-16, 16:51
I was being sarcastic :)
Stocks went down in Panic and with big noise to return back to normal and even grow in silence few weeks later.

P.s. I cant see your link.

bicicleur
20-07-16, 17:58
I was being sarcastic :)
Stocks went down in Panic and with big noise to return back to normal and even grow in silence few weeks later.

P.s. I cant see your link.

the link shows the GBP/USD rate
it is the invers of the graph in your link

Minty
31-03-17, 14:19
Now, with Britons living across the EU now wondering what Brexit will mean for their legal status abroad, many in France are looking to become citizens – a protracted process that mainly involves collecting a vast array of documentation