EU Referendum - In/Out?

[Ashley]

So 52% taking the other 48% in one direction is wrong because it's too close, but 48% taking the other 52% in the other direction is ok? Despite the same closeless and that the people getting their way are in the minority.

 

If that's how you and others feel then that's fine, I just hope everyone is consistant about this when they want change.

 

That the UK should be prevented from deciding itself what it wants to do, because it effects hundreds of millions of mostly non-British people, is exactly my problem with the EU. As a political union the EU is too big and too dependant on each other that many people will not tolerate the freedom of a nation do as it pleases or even leave.

 

I understand this, could it be that the racists think the other leavers are with them because so many of the remainers said you were racist to question the EU's immigration policy and want more immigration contro linto the UK? If anyone made this out to be a racist vs non-racist issue it was them.

 

It effects hundreds of millions of British people which is kind of the point...

 

UKIP's actions brought race into it, as did Gove/Johnson banging on about Turkey. It's not racist to question immigration, it is when you're saying "Turkey may join [they won't] soon and we all know what they are..."

 

Although the press made it far worse and have been doing it far longer (as have UKIP).

[pratty]

It effects hundreds of millions of British people which is kind of the point...

 

Hundreds of millions of British people? Is there even a hundred million Britons on the planet? What am I missing here? I assumed affects hundreds of millions of people refered to the collective population of the EU, because there are hundreds of millions of them. Are you counting anybody born abroad with any kind of British ancenestry, and saying they deserve a say in Britian's EU membership?

[Ashley]

Oh no it's just been a long few days and I'm going crazy

 

Sorry yes, not hundreds of millions. But it affects many millions of British people. In fact I'd argue it affects most of the population, even those that voted to Leave, in a way that was not made clear before and is becoming increasingly clear (with the pound plummeting, S&P reducing our credit rating, Moodys the same, strong likelihood of recession, tax increases, reductions in public spending etc).

[Nicktendo]

Hundreds of millions of British people? Is there even a hundred million Britons on the planet? What am I missing here? I assumed affects hundreds of millions of people refered to the collective population of the EU, because there are hundreds of millions of them. Are you counting anybody born abroad with any kind of British ancenestry, and saying they deserve a say in Britian's EU membership?

 

Quite obviously a typo to be fair...

[Ashley]

No I think I'm going crazy. It's been a long week with very little sleep.

[Choze]

If anyone made this out to be a racist vs non-racist issue it was them.

 

Pratty, how can you just say that? I suppose feminists are upset about gamer-gate because they made it an issue? The mess is what it is due to unrealistic views.

 

The problem we have now is that in order to get out of this mess, let us at least be honest about the problems we face. So we can deal with them. The economy, attitude to race and foreigners etc. The way these issues have been handled is poor over the last decades. Surely the common interest should be how to make the country better? Not mess it up.

[pratty]

Oh no it's just been a long few days and I'm going crazy

 

Sorry yes, not hundreds of millions.

 

No worries, I'm not looking to hammer you over it or take the piss.

 

But it affects many millions of British people. In fact I'd argue it affects most of the population, even those that voted to Leave, in a way that was not made clear before and is becoming increasingly clear (with the pound plummeting, S&P reducing our credit rating, Moodys the same, strong likelihood of recession, tax increases, reductions in public spending etc).

 

But we knew that the decision, if acted on, would affect the whole country. I like the idea of people having certain rights that cannot be voted away by a majority that doesn't like them, but I don't see how we could apply this idea to EU membership, what alternative is there then other than a democratic vote, or having no vote at all and just leaving our fate in the hands of our politicians? The latter might be practical in this case with regard to our economic stability, but as a general rule isn't this a dangerous power to give away to the government? To veto the dominant view of the country. It could come back to bite a lot of people on other issues.

[Ashley]

No worries, I'm not looking to hammer you over it or take the piss.

 

But we knew that the decision, if acted on, would affect the whole country. I like the idea of people having certain rights that cannot be voted away by a majority that doesn't like them, but I don't see how we could apply this idea to EU membership, what alternative is there then other than a democratic vote, or having no vote at all and just leaving our fate in the hands of our politicians? The latter might be practical in this case with regard to our economic stability, but as a general rule isn't this a dangerous power to give away to the government? To veto the dominant view of the country. It could come back to bite a lot of people on other issues.

 

If we rewind a bit this started with discussing whether it would be good (politically, socially etc) for the government to overturn the referendum and Serebii was arguing (and I joint in) given the impact it has already had, yet alone the one that is likely to come, there could arguably be a reason. One could argue that the government would be acting against the nation's best interest if our economic downturn is substantial, even if it means ignoring their democratic voice.

 

Although a better option would be to give some time to see how this is playing out, see what Europe is up to (more on that later) and then putting it to the electorate and say "we heard you before and we have acted upon it and now that we know the full extend, do you still want this?" You know, like how when you try and close an application and it says "you sure?"

 

But back to Europe...reading some analysis today and obviously its speculative at the moment but talk of France/Germany/Italy willing to give a 'EEA-' deal (i.e. worse than Norway) whereby they give us some concessions on immigration but at the same expense and more importantly with no financial passporting, which will ultimately lead to a lot of the financial industry (which if I recall correctly is worth 13% of either the country or London's economy, forget which) moving to those countries.

 

If that were to happen it would be cruelly ironic that we voted to "take back control" when in fact we've given Europe the control to decide on our future (at least in the short term) and could use it to benefit themselves while hurting us.

[Pestneb]

"Protectionist EU agricultural policies penalise African countries, meaning freer trade with the UK could help them to prosperity through trade."

 

Just a point here... I recall when I was at uni and looking at the chocolate trade in particular. Lots of people here talking about racists supporting leaving the EU, but actually the EU is quite protective of internal trade. Rules and regulations certainly used to prevent an African producer to take cocoa and turn it into chocolate (where most profit is) to sell to the EU. Instead, they had to sell the cocoa direct to Europe so that it could be turned into chocolate within the EU and keep the lions share of profit within the EU. Fairtrade was a joke for this very reason... we put a tiny percentage of "charity" to the cocoa farmers, then continue to pocket the majority of profit to ourselves, while patting ourselves on the back on how generous we are to the poor African farmers.

 

As I see it, the UK government would do best to look out to the rest of the world. India has a bigger population than the EU combined, strike a deal with them. Help them (not with hand outs, charity or by doing it for them, but through co-operation and sharing good practice with our partners) to tackle inequality (although if we still have a tory party maybe not so realistic ) and work hard. EFTA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Korea (south!!)... it's a big world out there. I don't think we should turn our back on the EU entirely, but if they ask us to eat humble pie, while there are attractive offers elsewhere, I say prioritise those who value what the UK has to offer.

 

As for the readiness of the EU to make a deal that won't hurt the UK... selfishness.

 

Germany = 20%

UK = 18%

France= 15%

 

Obviously this will alter drastically when the UK leaves.

 

Germany = 25%

France = 18%

Italy = 14%

 

1. France.. about 25% of their tourism industry relies on UK tourism. that's 2.5% of its GDP. A weak pound against the euro will dent that massively. Visa issues will also likely deter tourism. The UK passport is the strongest in the world in regards to visa free travel... countries outside the EU won't suddenly revoke the visa free status on the strength of the brexit, so if the EU does it will be harming its own tourism industry.

 

2. Germany

The UK is the third biggest export market... Cars anyone? Of course if the government fail to negotiate a good deal then we'll all be driving around in kias.. perhaps that ought to have been in the remain campaigns info! But again, weakening of the pound is not good news for Germany, nor is a bad trade deal for the UK. In seriousness, Korea have expressed an interest in a UK trade deal post brexit.. Hyundai, kia, daewoo and others await....

 

3. Italy

We only account for 5% of trade with Italy. I don't see any particular reason for Italy to do us any deals in honesty.

 

But France and Germany will hold a lot of sway. If they don't manage to either convince the UK to take a tough deal, or their EU partners to offer a sweeter deal, they are the two economies that would be hit hardest. Obviously it is interesting to the UK to maintain close ties to the EU, but other nations are showing interest in opening trade discussions with the UK immediately. That puts the rest of the world at an immediate advantage, and the UK may end up invoking article 50 having much less to lose... if we have smart politicians.

 

I think at the moment the UK should be spending more time exploring possibilities outside of the EU and less time crying about maybe not having the same deals as before with the EU member states (around 5% of the world population)

 

EFTA, Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, America.... this are big countries. The vote has been cast, our fate in regards to EU membership sealed... we obviously shouldn't shun the EU, but we need to act now. the referendum wasn't a loss, it was a game changer. The game may be tougher, it may be longer, it may be less generous, but it is the game we have to play.

[Choze]

"Protectionist EU agricultural policies penalise African countries, meaning freer trade with the UK could help them to prosperity through trade."

 

Just a point here... I recall when I was at uni and looking at the chocolate trade in particular. Lots of people here talking about racists supporting leaving the EU, but actually the EU is quite protective of internal trade. Rules and regulations certainly used to prevent an African producer to take cocoa and turn it into chocolate (where most profit is) to sell to the EU. Instead, they had to sell the cocoa direct to Europe so that it could be turned into chocolate within the EU and keep the lions share of profit within the EU. Fairtrade was a joke for this very reason... we put a tiny percentage of "charity" to the cocoa farmers, then continue to pocket the majority of profit to ourselves, while patting ourselves on the back on how generous we are to the poor African farmers.

 

As I see it, the UK government would do best to look out to the rest of the world. India has a bigger population than the EU combined, strike a deal with them. Help them (not with hand outs, charity or by doing it for them, but through co-operation and sharing good practice with our partners) to tackle inequality (although if we still have a tory party maybe not so realistic ) and work hard. EFTA, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Korea (south!!)... it's a big world out there. I don't think we should turn our back on the EU entirely, but if they ask us to eat humble pie, while there are attractive offers elsewhere, I say prioritise those who value what the UK has to offer.

 

As for the readiness of the EU to make a deal that won't hurt the UK... selfishness.

 

Germany = 20%

UK = 18%

France= 15%

 

Obviously this will alter drastically when the UK leaves.

 

Germany = 25%

France = 18%

Italy = 14%

 

1. France.. about 25% of their tourism industry relies on UK tourism. that's 2.5% of its GDP. A weak pound against the euro will dent that massively. Visa issues will also likely deter tourism. The UK passport is the strongest in the world in regards to visa free travel... countries outside the EU won't suddenly revoke the visa free status on the strength of the brexit, so if the EU does it will be harming its own tourism industry.

 

2. Germany

The UK is the third biggest export market... Cars anyone? Of course if the government fail to negotiate a good deal then we'll all be driving around in kias.. perhaps that ought to have been in the remain campaigns info! But again, weakening of the pound is not good news for Germany, nor is a bad trade deal for the UK. In seriousness, Korea have expressed an interest in a UK trade deal post brexit.. Hyundai, kia, daewoo and others await....

 

3. Italy

We only account for 5% of trade with Italy. I don't see any particular reason for Italy to do us any deals in honesty.

 

But France and Germany will hold a lot of sway. If they don't manage to either convince the UK to take a tough deal, or their EU partners to offer a sweeter deal, they are the two economies that would be hit hardest. Obviously it is interesting to the UK to maintain close ties to the EU, but other nations are showing interest in opening trade discussions with the UK immediately. That puts the rest of the world at an immediate advantage, and the UK may end up invoking article 50 having much less to lose... if we have smart politicians.

 

I think at the moment the UK should be spending more time exploring possibilities outside of the EU and less time crying about maybe not having the same deals as before with the EU member states (around 5% of the world population)

 

EFTA, Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, America.... this are big countries. The vote has been cast, our fate in regards to EU membership sealed... we obviously shouldn't shun the EU, but we need to act now. the referendum wasn't a loss, it was a game changer. The game may be tougher, it may be longer, it may be less generous, but it is the game we have to play.

 

OR you can read what experts have written regarding practically every angle the UK can take. I am impressed by the sheer amount of detail. There was an international policy article by the LSE and it had a profile for each and every country in Europe and their stance etc. It's a really long read though. The same blog had economic forecasts (4-8% GDP decline short run due to Brexit alone) etc. There are reports from London organisations that specialise with how various sectors will be affected.

 

But obviously who cares about experts? We are tired of them. Gove put it well.

[Pestneb]

Any links? I have read a couple of bits, but don't have a good place to find reliable papers etc.

Could you summarise what they said? the 4-8% decline, is that for the countries of europe and/or britain?

 

**Edit**

found these...

 

Sir,

 

Brexit would allow the UK to choose its own social and fiscal rules, and to control access to the UK labour market by migrants. As the UK is neither part of Schengen nor the Euro, and is doing better than most of the other countries on the continent, why would leaving the EU suddenly pose a problem? Brexit would be the trigger for a total renegotiation of the EU treaties by all European peoples, and would allow the EU to be transformed into a common market with supple confederal structures which would be more effective, freer and more prosperous. This new Europe would cost much less for the UK, which would save the £7 bn per year net it presently spends on EU membership. The City would preserve its international financial supremacy; there is no reason to have any confidence in declarations about the negative effects of Brexit, which would be good for Britain and good for Europe.

 

Pierre Gérard, former member of the Bank of France Monetary Policy Council

 

Henri Temple, professor emeritus of economic law, University of Montpelier

 

Guy Berger, emeritus professor, L’Écoles des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales

 

Not sure if they were just anglophobes hoping to get rid of the UK for good though

Edited June 29, 2016 by Pestneb

[Ashley]

First some light entertainment:

 

 

And then for something so sickeningly grotesque:

 

 

EU nationals in the UK (and UK nationals in the EU) are not pawns in your fucking game you fucking fuck. You stupid fucking useless fucking fuck. Fuck you.

 

(UKIP would you believe?)

[pratty]

Pratty, how can you just say that? I suppose feminists are upset about gamer-gate because they made it an issue? The mess is what it is due to unrealistic views.

 

The problem we have now is that in order to get out of this mess, let us at least be honest about the problems we face. So we can deal with them. The economy, attitude to race and foreigners etc. The way these issues have been handled is poor over the last decades. Surely the common interest should be how to make the country better? Not mess it up.

 

I'm not saying people shouldn't bring racism up, I said maybe the racists think other leave voters are racist too because so many remainers said they were.

 

The vote was about wanting to leave or to stay, it was not a racists vs non-racists vote about whether we should be racist to foreigners or not. The people I heard the most boiling this debate down to whether you were racist/xenophobic or not were people on the stay side generalising remainers as insecure, racist or xenophobic little Englanders that what wanted to keep the foreigners out simply because they were foreign, and it was they that labelled the vote to leave as racist/xenophobic and the vote to stay as tolerant and welcoming, implying there was something dirty and disgraceful about wanting to leave.

 

I'll give you a personal example, here's recent email conversation I had with a friend on the day of the vote:

 

My friend:

 

I swear if I wake up in little fucking england tommorow im gonna drink all day! (im hopeful like with the ukip threat last year…it will be a lot of talk by the working class but they wont bother to vote.

 

(remember when the working class used to vote labour before they were all manipulated with fear)

 

 

My reply:

 

I voted leave. The likes of BoJo and Farage didn't influence me at all, I've barely listened to the leave campaign. I've been against the EU for years.

 

For me the accusations of fear on both sides is overplayed, any decision anybody makes is made in fear of consequences of the wrong decision. The remainers fear leaving and the leavers fear remaining, so it's a moot point.

 

My argument is what is a nation if it doesn't completely decide things itself? It's effectively an administrative region of the EU. Negotiating special deals and opt outs isn't good enough, because that implies it's conditional and that we need permission. No country should have to seek approval from outside itself to do as it pleases internally. Anything less is a surrender of self determination. Trade deals are one thing, but the EU is far more than that and Europe is too big and diverse of broad one-size-fits-all regulations.

 

 

His reply:

 

Jesus Mike, your 1 cold hearted rite wing sob.

 

Well you can celebrate with Putin and Farage and the rest of your team today.

 

Independence day (I think you fucked up, in 2 gens you’re the gen that will be blamed for massively fucking up (not the government the PEOPLE)....We will see though....

 

Who alluded to and brought attitudes to race into the discussion? who was making the broad generalisations about voters? Who was the angry and aggressive one? Apparently I'm a far right scumbag even though my reason didn't even mention immigration. And this is coming from a friend! He's so convinced only a xenophobe or racist, and someone down with Farage and Putin could entertain the idea of wanting to leave the EU. So which of us is summing the debate up as one about racism and xenophobia?

 

This has just been my experience and perspective though, maybe others saw it differently, which is fine.

 

People like Farage obviously put immigration and by extension the perceived detrimental effect of large numbers of foreigners coming into the country at the front of their campaign, but that concern in itself isn't racist in my opinion. It really comes down to what specific people say and their personal motivations as to whether their stance on immigration is racist or not.

Edited June 30, 2016 by pratty

[Ashley]

The Tory leadership contest is really turning out to be a Sophie's Choice of awful bastards isn't it?

 

And a lot of them are talking about not having a snap election so there you go. Unelected officials.

 

People like Farage obviously put immigration and by extension the perceived detrimental effect of large numbers of foreigners coming into the country at the front of their campaign, but that concern in itself isn't racist in my opinion. It really comes down to what specific people say and their personal motivations as to whether their stance on immigration is racist or not.

 

I want to pick up on this point a bit. When Farage says hearing foreign voices on a train makes him "uncomfortable" and how he doesn't think it's right for families to not speak English as a primary language in their home and calling parts of Britain "foreign land" he absolutely is feeding into a racist rhetoric that we're seeing unfold now.

Edited June 30, 2016 by Ashley

[Kav]

[tweet]748445383014105089[/tweet]

Edited June 30, 2016 by Kav

[Pestneb]

The Tory leadership contest is really turning out to be a Sophie's Choice of awful bastards isn't it?

 

And a lot of them are talking about not having a snap election so there you go. Unelected officials.

 

 

 

I want to pick up on this point a bit. When Farage says hearing foreign voices on a train makes him "uncomfortable" and how he doesn't think it's right for families to not speak English as a primary language in their home and calling parts of Britain "foreign land" he absolutely is feeding into a racist rhetoric that we're seeing unfold now.

 

In fairness, we don't elect the prime minister, we elect our representative in parliament and the party to which they belong elects one amongst those elected ministers to be the prime minister. Boris J has been elected, just as Cameron was.

 

 

I agree... in the home people will naturally speak their native tongue. How many languages does Farage speak? only one I should imagine. I can speak in a couple of other languages with my mum, but we both communicate together in English, because our combined fluency is stronger in English than it is in any other language. It's not a political choice or because English is the native language outside.

 

I agree that if you live in a country you should be able to communicate at the very least at a basic level.. but extending that into the home is a bit excessive. I assume he can't speak German (he is/was married to a German right???)

 

And then for something so sickeningly grotesque:

 

 

EU nationals in the UK (and UK nationals in the EU) are not pawns in your fucking game you fucking fuck. You stupid fucking useless fucking fuck. Fuck you.

 

(UKIP would you believe?)

 

Well I hope he was discussing protecting UK emigrants rights more so than discussing attacking EU immigrants rights... though his language seems to say the opposite. So I just hope he is nowhere near the negotiating table!

 

Also, in raw numbers he may be right, double EU immigrants than UK emigrants... but proportionally would it not be reversed, with 2% of the UK being emigrants vs 1% from the EU in the UK?

[Daft]

So long Boris. You fucked everything and then fucked off. I think that's as close as you'll get to a social-cleansing drive-by.

 

Jesus, it's between the homophobe Crabb, Michael 'Doesn't trust experts' Gove, and Theresa May.

 

Edited June 30, 2016 by Daft

[Mr-Paul]

He's wimped out. It's all been one big game to him, and now the going has got tough, he doesn't want to play any more.

 

What a wonderful pair of people we've got as candidates to be the next Prime Minister. May or Gove. Awful.

[Blade]

Bojo pulls out. I'm not actually surprised. He was never actually a Leaver and he cannot pull the Art 50. He also doesn't want to be tainted with it.

 

Out of all the Tory candidates it has to be Theresa May. I think she is the best out of a terrible bunch. I think she would be a leader and have the clout to at least accomplish something.

 

Meanwhile at the launch of the anti-semite report into the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn compares Israel to ISIS. Wow!! Just wow!!

[Daft]

Meanwhile at the launch of the anti-semite report into the Labour Party Jeremy Corbyn compares Israel to ISIS. Wow!! Just wow!!

 

That's not really what he said though.

 

He said you can no more blame a Jewish person for the actions of Israel as you can blame a Muslim for the actions of ISIS.

 

Which...is true.

 

And Israel have for too long conflated their efforts to raze Palestine to the ground with anti-semitism. So they have brought that comparison on themselves.

[Blade]

I just found it odd that he would choose the launch of an anti-semite report to make those comments not the actual comments themselves.

[Cube]

So who is left? Gove, who wants to end the NHS, and May, who wants to end privacy?

 

Anyone else?

[bob]

Oh God I want it all to end.

 

Gove cannot be allowed to be Prime Minister.

[Ashley]

In fairness, we don't elect the prime minister, we elect our representative in parliament and the party to which they belong elects one amongst those elected ministers to be the prime minister. Boris J has been elected, just as Cameron was.

 

I agree... in the home people will naturally speak their native tongue. How many languages does Farage speak? only one I should imagine. I can speak in a couple of other languages with my mum, but we both communicate together in English, because our combined fluency is stronger in English than it is in any other language. It's not a political choice or because English is the native language outside.

 

I agree that if you live in a country you should be able to communicate at the very least at a basic level.. but extending that into the home is a bit excessive. I assume he can't speak German (he is/was married to a German right???)

 

Well I hope he was discussing protecting UK emigrants rights more so than discussing attacking EU immigrants rights... though his language seems to say the opposite. So I just hope he is nowhere near the negotiating table!

 

Also, in raw numbers he may be right, double EU immigrants than UK emigrants... but proportionally would it not be reversed, with 2% of the UK being emigrants vs 1% from the EU in the UK?

 

Some people may vote on the basis of the leader, but yeah it will be a small number. My real point was as much as people moaned about the EU have unelected officials, we have it here (House of Lords for example) so while I kind of understand the sentiment I never really got how it was apparently so different.

 

His wife is German and I honestly wouldn't be surprised if he didn't let her speak German at home.

 

It has nothing to do with numbers. These are people whose lives are currently uncertain, who are facing abuse (at least people here, not sure how it's playing out across Europe) and they need answers quickly, not to be used in political football. It was a dehumanising statement.

 

Out of all the Tory candidates it has to be Theresa May. I think she is the best out of a terrible bunch. I think she would be a leader and have the clout to at least accomplish something.

 

Ms "Go Home" herself...

[Serebii]

Welp, time to go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for all of this to blow over

 

We're fucked