Whether Brexit happens or not, it doesn't matter.
I give 50 years.
After 50 years, both Euro and EU will not exist.
It is either rich country leaves one by one or via WW3.
Whether Brexit happens or not, it doesn't matter.
I give 50 years.
After 50 years, both Euro and EU will not exist.
It is either rich country leaves one by one or via WW3.
Seems to me Germany is the only place with a false sense of security/sovereignty.
http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/24/one-de...rmany-6026100/
How often does it have to happen, twice a week? Twice a day? How many innocents have to die until you admit you are wrong?
13/11/2022 Sir Keir Starmer. "Brexit is safe in my hands, Let me be really clear about Brexit. There is no case for going back into the EU and no case for going into the single market or customs union. Freedom of movement is over"
Problem from about the announcement of the date of the vote until a month before the vote everyone who was in camp remain was going with the "I don't agree voting Leave was the best decision because reasons, and we have a consensus from experts in Finances, economics, science, business, etc etc etc backing us with these figures " Yet time and time again the rational argument kept being ignored and in the end we ended up with people saying "You rely too much on experts." or "I'm a mother I know best." or "People are fed up with experts." from the leave camp.
That was when in the end we in remain realised the leave camp pretty much was brain dead morons who kept screaming "Dem immigrants, dey took er jerbs." style who basically can't and shouldn't be treated as rational adults and why in the end the fact is "Those voted out are morons." came to be, because they proved it
Lets not pretend that the Brexit was about anything other than refugees. Sure there were some other talking points, but a major part of it hinged on them. Honestly I don't know why they don't just say they refuse the refugees, refuse to pay the penalty for not accepting refugees, and dare the EU to do something about it. Seems much more sensible than willingly walking away from the benefits the EU brings.
Funny thing is, it doesn't even affect refugees in any way. The UK isn't in Schengen zone and doesn't have to let them in; if other EU members try to press the issue, the UK can always opt out of it, as it's always done: "We have our own border policies, get out".
Yet many people thought they were deciding between letting refugees in or not. Once again demonstrating, that perhaps referendums aren't that great of an idea! Cameron initiated the referendum, probably hoping that people would actually have an idea on what they were voting on. Oh well...
General consensus from the 'stupid' voters was that it was about immigration and sovereignty, not refugees. From the more informed Leave camp, it was about getting rid of EU restrictions and growing the UK as an independent, strong economy.
I don't think I heard anyone mention refugees as anything other than an offhanded comment.
Not necessarily. In fact, most of the complaints I've heard have been about muslims and poles. The reason I believe 'immigration' to be a retarded choice to leave is because Poles will enter this country regardless of our position in the EU, because they typically have sought-after professions. As for immigrants from Asia, they won't really be affected at all.
If a voter is mixing up immigration with refuge, then it is sad that they were allowed to vote in the first place with such uninformed opinions. I don't care about far right / far left, whatever your political standing is, but I do believe you need at least a basic grasp of what you're voting on in order to make a decision in good confidence.
Immigration is a retarded reason to leave, but unfortunately, thats the reason we left over.
The entire debate came down to immigration, and tapped into nationalism, so you've got one side having to argue against its own people, atleast in the eyes of the folks who voted Brexit.
Because people who screamed "Project Fear" at the Remain campaign, were already leading there own scare campaign, which was just more effective.
There is no way it won't happen. What UK and Germany is shooting for now is for UK to 'quit' EU on paper, but not quit it really. That way the brexit supporters will get their exit and it won't hurt UK and EU too much.
UK strategy for brexit ... still want open trade with EU and be a major player in Europe. How do you do that ? Join EU .... ok, give me something similar, but not that.
My part in this story has been decided. And I will play it well.
Yes, I feel like there is a fundamental contradiction in this. To make informed decisions, they must be done by a small circle of devoted specialists. In theory, people are supposed to control them and to not let them use their power for their own gain. In practice, however, since people are not informed, they cannot always decide objectively whether what the government is doing is good or bad. Too much power for the government - and usurpation happens; too little - and people start making horrible decisions. Maybe there is a balance somewhere, but I'm not sure it is stable: it still tends to eventually jump in one of the directions.
We just need an electronic government, with AIs making mathematically perfect decisions, and with people merely making sure that the power is always supplied. Although, who knows, we might end up with a dictatorship of a scale unknown to date.
Met enough, saw enough to see there is a consensus about why they left and it was never well thought out or based on logic. It was emotional stupidity.
- - - Updated - - -
Problem was (and this was repeated time and time again) the UK was under no obligation and would not be punished for not taking any refugees. Hell we were only going to take 20k. You know how big 20k is? You'd need 4 times that amount to fill up Old Trafford.
Not only that it wasn't 20k all at once. It was 20k over a number of years and spread all over the country. Basically it was so small that 99% of Brits likely wouldn't have seen one.