Brexit Thread

[Greyblades]

...what, you thought Brexit was about cutting off contact with Europe alltogether? Stopping all cooperation?

The last few months, did you consume any media that wasnt anti brexit?

Also: Boris=Brexit, hah, yeah right.

[Husar]

The referendum has given the government it's marching orders; the MP's promised to follow them and are expected to get moving and if they dont a majority of them will be evicted for those who do, case closed.

If that's so easy, why the need for a referendum?
Could have voted for a Brexit government right away.

You also make Brexit sound like anonymous.

[Greyblades]

If that's so easy, why the need for a referendum?
Could have voted for a Brexit government right away.

Because public support has never been that big for a pro Brexit government. None of the major parties wanted to touch the issue to avoid rocking the boat and the small ones that did were too untrustworthy, I mean 5 years is a long time to put up with a party who's only main attraction is removed the second they get into power, we lucked out with Cameron’s blunder as it let us get it done well before the kind of unrest accumulated to see a ukip givernment, this could have become a lot more messy.

[I of the Storm]

Personally, I'm rather disappointed by the stance the commission is taking. To be precise, by the fact that they apply the maximum possible pressure on UK's govt to declare article 50 by June 28 (which they won't do). I don't see what's to gain by taking this position. You'd think that a) it's a completely internal matter to the UK if or when they will declare their wish to leave the union and b) that it would be more sensible to wait and see what happens for a few days - or better: weeks. I don't get it.

This is probably the wrong place to ask but I do it anyway: Does this decision have to be taken to parliament or not?

[Pannonian]

Personally, I'm rather disappointed by the stance the commission is taking. To be precise, by the fact that they apply the maximum possible pressure on UK's govt to declare article 50 by June 28 (which they won't do). I don't see what's to gain by taking this position. You'd think that a) it's a completely internal matter to the UK if or when they will declare their wish to leave the union and b) that it would be more sensible to wait and see what happens for a few days - or better: weeks. I don't get it.

This is probably the wrong place to ask but I do it anyway: Does this decision have to be taken to parliament or not?

They're probably uncertain what to apply pressure on. The ruling party's leader has resigned and has made sure that his successor will deal with the mess. The main opposition party is falling apart with every hour. The country itself may not be in the same physical shape in a few months' time. Just what bits of the UK will still be within the UK when the time comes to kick its arse?

[I of the Storm]

Ok, then why apply pressure at all? Let them sort out their mess and watch.

"Pleasant it is, when over a great sea the winds trouble the waters, to gaze from shore upon another's tribulation: not because any man's troubles are a delectable joy, but because to perceive from what ills you are free yourself is pleasant. "

No?

[Greyblades]

There are two wills in action here: brussels bureaucrats and european leaders.

Brussels wants Britain out quickly; damage us by forcing us to rush negotiations and get bad deals with the intent of making leaving seem as unpalatable as possible "pour encorager les autres" in an effort to avoid having to reform the European Union to preserve it.

The European leaders on the other hand are trying to preserve a highly valuable customer for European trade and are willing to let the negotiations take thier time and preserve good will with Britain, as far as they're concerned preserving the EU is secondary to thier national interests. The only exception to this is France's Hollande whose national interest is tied to the EU.

[Gilrandir]

And Beskar I dont think the Guardian can be trusted anymore, its reporters were found out for lying and for goodness sakes its a front for George Soros

Soros came on the right side of it - counting his profits again.
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/24/georg...it-plunge.html

Can Cameron hang on long enough to give us a third referendum, this time to divorce London and the south east from the rest of the country? That would conclusively solve the problem of London-centrism once and for all.

A new blend: Londependence
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7101006.html

Brussels wants Britain out quickly; damage us by forcing us to rush negotiations and get bad deals with the intent of making leaving seem as unpalatable as possible "pour encorager les autres" in an effort to avoid having to reform the European Union to preserve it.

I like it! First they get a divorce decision, and then they hope to live in the same house for an idefinite time, get a share in the spouse's salary (until they get their finances in order) and have sex with him (until some time later). Now I know what siff upper lip is.

[Pannonian]

Consequences of Brexit

Leaders have made clear, before and after the vote, that Britain is not getting access to the single market.

“Out is out,” said Wolfgang Schaeuble, the German finance minister, some weeks ago.

“There will certainly be no cherry picking,” confirmed Mr Juncker, saying it will be a "clean" divorce.

More likely is a Canadian-style trade deal, that will set tariffs on imports and exports. That may be fine for German manufacturers. But Britain’s service economy will be cut up like an old car. British graduates are about to learn what it's like to use an Australian-style points system.

Article 50 is designed so that it leaves any state that activates it is a supplicant.

The remaining EU states will negotiate between themselves and deal with the UK as one, just as they would for Albania or Turkey.

If a deal covering trade arrangements isn’t struck once the two-year period expires, Britain is simply released from the EU treaties and left on crippling WTO terms - something the Treasury terms a "severe shock scenario" and which it envisages would likely result in a cut in GDP of six per cent and increase unemployment by 800,000, not including the risks presented by emergency spending cuts, or the "tipping points" presented by the crystallisation of financial stability risks.

It means the government will effectively be forced to take any fait accompli presented at the last minute, or face ruin.

Even then, any further trade deal will require ratification by EU parliaments, meaning Belgian MPs, amongst others, can veto it.

[AntiDamascus]

You just have to throw your hands up at this stuff sometimes. This is stuff I've seen all over different sites. It's the same routine.

Nothing but positives for leaving. Everything will be awesome. Those EU guys suck and they need us.
Ok yea we had to lie about stuff but it's because the other side is mean and lying so the only way to get people to our better ideas is to lie about them.
We don't actually have to do anything. That's the job of the people we don't like. All that matters to us is we're leaving and don't have to deal with those guys in the EU anymore.
Why would the EU be mean to us? Look at this, we want all the upsides and none of the downsides and maybe in process kill their group and instead of lavishing us in sweet deals they want us out?

It's everyone's problem but the people who want to leave. It's the fault of the Remain people that stuff isn't going great. Even though UK leaving EU could very well cripple it, they should be super nice to UK and give them sweet deals even though they've been badmouthing them constantly. I've rarely seen a group so caught up in "it's not our fault" about the one thing that is almost entirely their fault.

[Pannonian]

You just have to throw your hands up at this stuff sometimes. This is stuff I've seen all over different sites. It's the same routine.

Nothing but positives for leaving. Everything will be awesome. Those EU guys suck and they need us.
Ok yea we had to lie about stuff but it's because the other side is mean and lying so the only way to get people to our better ideas is to lie about them.
We don't actually have to do anything. That's the job of the people we don't like. All that matters to us is we're leaving and don't have to deal with those guys in the EU anymore.
Why would the EU be mean to us? Look at this, we want all the upsides and none of the downsides and maybe in process kill their group and instead of lavishing us in sweet deals they want us out?

It's everyone's problem but the people who want to leave. It's the fault of the Remain people that stuff isn't going great. Even though UK leaving EU could very well cripple it, they should be super nice to UK and give them sweet deals even though they've been badmouthing them constantly. I've rarely seen a group so caught up in "it's not our fault" about the one thing that is almost entirely their fault.

They want all their desires to be fulfilled but it's never their responsibility and they expect their living standards to be maintained by the government. Ironically, many of them simultaneously moan at leftists for the culture of entitlement.

[Sarmatian]

Even then, any further trade deal will require ratification by EU parliaments, meaning Belgian MPs, amongst others, can veto it.

I'm having a smile on my face thinking how cool it would be if some Bulgarian MPs block UK trade deals with EU.

It will take some time for Brits to realize just how bad they **cked up.

[Pannonian]

I'm having a smile on my face thinking how cool it would be if some Bulgarian MPs block UK trade deals with EU.

It will take some time for Brits to realize just how bad they **cked up.

Londoners and Scots already know it.

Also, on Friday, the value of the pound dropped enough so that. within 24 hours of the referendum result, the UK economy dropped from the 5th to the 6th biggest in the world, overtaken by France.

[HopAlongBunny]

So far, isn't this just a tempest in a teapot?
The gov't of Britain has a mandate from its people to leave the EU; there is no compulsion to actually do so
Invoking Article 50 is a voluntary act; it is a button they never have to push.

[Greyblades]

You just have to throw your hands up at this stuff sometimes. This is stuff I've seen all over different sites. It's the same routine.

Nothing but positives for leaving. Everything will be awesome. Those EU guys suck and they need us.
Ok yea we had to lie about stuff but it's because the other side is mean and lying so the only way to get people to our better ideas is to lie about them.
We don't actually have to do anything. That's the job of the people we don't like. All that matters to us is we're leaving and don't have to deal with those guys in the EU anymore.
Why would the EU be mean to us? Look at this, we want all the upsides and none of the downsides and maybe in process kill their group and instead of lavishing us in sweet deals they want us out?

It's everyone's problem but the people who want to leave. It's the fault of the Remain people that stuff isn't going great. Even though UK leaving EU could very well cripple it, they should be super nice to UK and give them sweet deals even though they've been badmouthing them constantly. I've rarely seen a group so caught up in "it's not our fault" about the one thing that is almost entirely their fault.

...no we're saying it's not our job to tell the people who call themselves our leaders how to do thier jobs. We know what we want done it's the politicians jib to fivure out how to do it, If johnson and Gove had no plan on what to do next when they jumped the bandwagon that was thier stupidity and if they cannot come up with something we will find someone who can, UKIP was fipled with such people and if the current tories or labour cant do it then they will have to step down.

[Husar]

Personally, I'm rather disappointed by the stance the commission is taking. To be precise, by the fact that they apply the maximum possible pressure on UK's govt to declare article 50 by June 28 (which they won't do). I don't see what's to gain by taking this position. You'd think that a) it's a completely internal matter to the UK if or when they will declare their wish to leave the union and b) that it would be more sensible to wait and see what happens for a few days - or better: weeks. I don't get it.

This is probably the wrong place to ask but I do it anyway: Does this decision have to be taken to parliament or not?

The sooner we can rename it to Merkelreich, the better we will all be off.

[AntiDamascus]

...no we're saying it's not our job to tell the people who call themselves our leaders how to do thier jobs. We know what we want done it's the politicians jib to fivure out how to do it, If johnson and Gove had no plan on what to do next when they jumped the bandwagon that was thier stupidity and if they cannot come up with something we will find someone who can, UKIP was fipled with such people and if the current tories or labour cant do it then they will have to step down.

These are vague plans in search of a leader to get them done. I'm reminded of like on tv or movies little rich kids yelling at butlers that they want a pony and if they don't get one their daddy will get a butler who does. And those kids are viewed, quite rightly, as spoiled brats.
If it was as easy as it seems, we'd all just vote in guys to solve our problems. Billions and billions in money, dozens of countries. Treaties and status and upset leaders concerned with their own countries issues. "We voted for it, get it done"

It's almost comical. "We vote for all the awesome stuff and none of the bad stuff. Done. That was easy. Don't know why anyone didn't do that before. We're smart."

[AntiDamascus]

I don't see what's to gain by taking this position. You'd think that a) it's a completely internal matter to the UK if or when they will declare their wish to leave the union and b) that it would be more sensible to wait and see what happens for a few days - or better: weeks. I don't get it.

Uh no, no it isn't. You can tell it's not an internal matter when it's.... you know, a union. Breaking a grouping is almost by definition not internal. I'm not sure why it's a shock to you that the people you're leaving maybe kinda sorta don't want to give you a nice way out, since you're hurting them and possibly killing the group in the long run.

[Pannonian]

Uh no, no it isn't. You can tell it's not an internal matter when it's.... you know, a union. Breaking a grouping is almost by definition not internal. I'm not sure why it's a shock to you that the people you're leaving maybe kinda sorta don't want to give you a nice way out, since you're hurting them and possibly killing the group in the long run.

I bet Frag's happy. After egging Brits on to do this, he gets to see how a Nexit would play out, but he doesn't have to pay the price of seeing how it does. Unlike London, which emphatically did not vote Leave. Bad luck London though, as the regioners tell us to suck it up and pay them what the EU will no longer be giving them, and you can't dodge this subsidy because you're physically joined to us so ner.

If there's an independence referendum for the south east, or anything amounting to the same, I would vote for it, to get away from the regions. London is culturally closer to the continent than to Cornwall, Wales and their like. I've been to the continent multiple times. I've never been to Cornwall or Wales, and it wouldn't hurt me if I never go there in my lifetime.

[InsaneApache]

On independence for London, just a couple of thoughts.

Where will you grow your food.

How will you generate enough electricity for the city.

It'd be like Leningrad.

[Pannonian]

On independence for London, just a couple of thoughts.

Where will you grow your food.

How will you generate enough electricity for the city.

It'd be like Leningrad.

London plus neighbouring counties is about as self-sustaining as London plus the rest of England. The south east doesn't need the rest of England.

[InsaneApache]

It's chuffing hilarious watching the establishment disintegrate.

London plus neighbouring counties is about as self-sustaining as London plus the rest of England. The south east doesn't need the rest of England.

Go for it then.

.

[Husar]

Where will you grow your food.

How will you generate enough electricity for the city.

http://www.thepunctuationguide.com/question-mark.html

They could also get these things from trade, e.g. by rejoining the EU or leaving the UK before the (rest-)UK leaves the EU.
It just goes to show that the nation state is the best thing ever that consists only of like-minded people, so ideally no more than 5...

[InsaneApache]

They'd have to negotiate a trade deal with the UK.

Unless they all die of starvation first.

[AntiDamascus]

On independence for London, just a couple of thoughts.

Where will you grow your food.

How will you generate enough electricity for the city.

It'd be like Leningrad.

I dunno, I would think they need London more than London needs them. It'll be great really.

Or are we implying that being part of a greater whole, even if it's not perfect and sometimes bothersome, is better than breaking away? Cause that just sounds silly. :D

[Pannonian]

http://www.thepunctuationguide.com/question-mark.html

They could also get these things from trade, e.g. by rejoining the EU or leaving the UK before the (rest-)UK leaves the EU.
It just goes to show that the nation state is the best thing ever that consists only of like-minded people, so ideally no more than 5...

The south east contains large amounts of farmland and other faculties. London by itself doesn't grow much food (very little within the boroughs). Add the neighbouring counties, and there's practically as much civil infrastructure as if you include the rest of England. Break off the south east as London the civil centre plus hinterland, and the rest of England adds very little to London's needs. Perhaps everything east of Oxfordshire plus everything south of Norfolk inclusive, or basically the old Angle and Saxon kingdoms.

[Beskar]

As I said earlier, economically, it might be better for London to separate from the Rest of the UK. London acts like a magnet, drawing all the economic activity towards it, and there is no counterbalance in the UK unlike other countries. Whitehall policies are also generally focused on the south and south-west, and these are enacted at the expense of the rest of the UK.

As such, if London leaves, it will no longer act like a magnet, thus it would give rise to growth and prosperity to other cities such as Manchester, Edinburgh, etc. Or we could have proper regional governments to help foster this.

Found an old article on the subject too...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21934564

[Pannonian]

As I said earlier, economically, it might be better for London to separate from the Rest of the UK. London acts like a magnet, drawing all the economic activity towards it, and there is no counterbalance in the UK unlike other countries.

As such, if London leaves, it will no longer act like a magnet, thus it would give rise to growth and prosperity to other cities such as Manchester, Edinburgh, etc.

Perhaps London, Manchester, Edinburgh and other likeminded cities can band together in a European league, away from the Europhobes elsewhere.

[InsaneApache]

As I said earlier, economically, it might be better for London to separate from the Rest of the UK. London acts like a magnet, drawing all the economic activity towards it, and there is no counterbalance in the UK unlike other countries. Whitehall policies are also generally focused on the south and south-west, and these are enacted at the expense of the rest of the UK.

As such, if London leaves, it will no longer act like a magnet, thus it would give rise to growth and prosperity to other cities such as Manchester, Edinburgh, etc. Or we could have proper regional governments to help foster this.

Found an old article on the subject too...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21934564

What do you plan to do to all the Londoners who voted to leave?

I know, you could have a good old socialist purge and 're-educate' them. In camps of course. After all, it's for their own good.

You know it makes sense.

[I of the Storm]

Uh no, no it isn't. You can tell it's not an internal matter when it's.... you know, a union. Breaking a grouping is almost by definition not internal. I'm not sure why it's a shock to you that the people you're leaving maybe kinda sorta don't want to give you a nice way out, since you're hurting them and possibly killing the group in the long run.

That's not wrong but not correct either. UK's not quite there yet, as art. 50 hasn't been invoked yet. Only when there's an official declaration stating the wish to leave the EU by UK's govt., it becomes a multilateral issue.
Until then, it's strictly internal matter. Formally, we're dealing with a non-binding referendum. In theory the govt. could simply not give a fuck about it (disregarding the political consequences of such an action for the sake of argument).

I'm not leaving anyone btw. Not a UK citizen. I just think this matter should be handled more even-handedly.