Jump to content

Brexit


Recommended Posts

@Rapier: I'm not so sure about economic stability, but the major view of why people voted to leave the EU seemed to be because of disdain for migrants, not anything else, and that's what the majority of talk was about.

As for the US, I think we actually got it from you (okay that isn't fair but it's very comparable). Trump does the exact same and bases his entire campaign around saying things that appeal to emotion but not reason. It's already pretty much happening. Though I somehow think that Trump becoming US president is a worse outcome then this, so go figure.

Edited by Tryhard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

As for the US, I think we actually got it from you. Trump does the exact same and bases his entire campaign around saying things that appeal to emotion but not reason. It's already pretty much happening.

Unfortunately, that's probably the case. I'm hoping that what's happening in Britain now will force a lot of people to rethink things and not vote on emotion, though, kind of like a "don't let this be you in five months from now -- know what you are voting for and don't regret it" thing.

I'm pretty sure the U.S. won't remember Brexit in five month's time, though ;/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT I DON'T EVEN

At this point, I can't really say too much about this since I'm not from the UK and I didn't even know you guys were voting on this until last night, when the votes were being counted. All I can do is support Shin. But my issue right now is, why the fuck did people not do research before they voted to leave why was there no exit plan why were people so wholly unprepared for this what the fuck

To be honest this is just the most glaring symptom of voters not taking the effort to understand/not willing to admit they don't understand/voting against for the sake of pissing off the "political class"/ignoring what people who know a lot about the subject say, out of some weird prejudice against them. In other words its the most recent highly visible evidence that populism is still as destructive a force in democracy as kt has been for a few hundred years now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rapier: I'm not so sure about economic stability, but the major view of why people voted to leave the EU seemed to be because of disdain for migrants, not anything else, and that's what the majority of talk was about.

As for the US, I think we actually got it from you (okay that isn't fair but it's very comparable). Trump does the exact same and bases his entire campaign around saying things that appeal to emotion but not reason. It's already pretty much happening. Though I somehow think that Trump becoming US president is a worse outcome then this, so go figure.

About economic stability, yeah, we know it'll be hard in short term, but the long term consequences are difficult if not impossible to point. I think it'll recover, but there's no evidence backing up this optimism of mine, so... The immigrant blaming is truly stupid though, I agree.

People aren't going to learn from this. Expecting that they'll start making research and having educated opinions on complicated, controverted matters that the common citizen has no time or preparation to develop a solid opinion about just so suddenly is wishful thinking (not saying that this is what you said). Smart, conscious people are always a minority that has to suffer with the ignorance of their peers. If anything it is recurrent that people vote with emotion and with what they perceive as their need. If someone sees an immigrant working on a place where they could be working while they're unemployed, chances are said person will start disliking immigrants (this is not a justification, but an explanation of their thought proccess). It's easier to adhere to this gut reaction than develop an intelligent opinion about it and see the bigger picture.

Edited by Rapier
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I can't see many cons against GB leaving the EU. More freedom to legislate about things of your own country instead of being forced to adhere to external pressures and impositions through treaties from people who have no idea about your country's needs is always good, and it seems the GB can stand on its own even without being a part of the EU (the current low price of the pound is not an evidence of the contrary. Of course its currency is going to take a hit on turbulent times, such a thing is to be expected, that doesn't mean those effects are going to be long term).

Completely wrong. More than half of GBs exports go to EU countries, about half of their imports come from the EU, and the london stock exchange is the financial hub it is because of the access it has to the rest of the European market. In other words, GB is economically highly dependent on and intertwined with the EU economy at large.

 

Now, if one leaves the EU they also leave the EEC, and thus will need to have a trade agreement with member states and the EU to be allowed access to their markets again. Adherence to a decent number of European laws and entrance to Schengen are a non negotiable part of any trade agreements the EU makes. (see: Norway and Switzerland) GB had a lot of economical benefits because it was a member of the EU, and past threats got them a bunch more concessions, very notably they had a huge reduction on what they would normally be required to pay as membership fee. These are now off the table as well.

 

To put it simply, the UK needs a trade agreement with the EU to not face economic meltdown. They will need to adhere to European law because of this, but have lost the ability to have any influence on legislative action. They also invariably lose all of the other perks they built u over the years. So they don't get the freedom to make their own legislation, they just lost part of it, immigration will still be a thing because they'll still be I schengen, and economically they're much worse off than before.


UK leaves; NL, FR, possibly others follow; the United States's greatest ally balkanizes; Russia rises in regional power

Ahahaha, no. Especially no considering what's been going down today in the UK.

 

MODEDIT: dude

Edited by Integrity
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely wrong. More than half of GBs exports go to EU countries, about half of their imports come from the EU, and the london stock exchange is the financial hub it is because of the access it has to the rest of the European market. In other words, GB is economically highly dependent on and intertwined with the EU economy at large.

Now, if one leaves the EU they also leave the EEC, and thus will need to have a trade agreement with member states and the EU to be allowed access to their markets again. Adherence to a decent number of European laws and entrance to Schengen are a non negotiable part of any trade agreements the EU makes. (see: Norway and Switzerland) GB had a lot of economical benefits because it was a member of the EU, and past threats got them a bunch more concessions, very notably they had a huge reduction on what they would normally be required to pay as membership fee. These are now off the table as well.

To put it simply, the UK needs a trade agreement with the EU to not face economic meltdown. They will need to adhere to European law because of this, but have lost the ability to have any influence on legislative action. They also invariably lose all of the other perks they built u over the years. So they don't get the freedom to make their own legislation, they just lost part of it, immigration will still be a thing because they'll still be I schengen, and economically they're much worse off than before.

Alright, but what is stopping them from making trade agreements again while being free of external intervention? I know they won't have the same privileges as before, but it's a way to conciliate both - I can't see how those things are mutually exclusive. Unless I misunderstood you and you meant that they can't trade with members of the EU anymore because the GB left it, which is something I don't remember seeing when I read about the EU's system (it was a long time ago though).

EDIT: Oh. Alright, that's sensible. If GB needs trade agreements with the EU and they'll have to adhere to European laws anyway, that's redundant. Still, can't they cling toward the US and other countries instead to compensate?

Edited by Rapier
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT: Oh. Alright, that's sensible. If GB needs trade agreements with the EU and they'll have to adhere to European laws anyway, that's redundant. Still, can't they cling toward the US and other countries instead to compensate?

They could try to opt for other countries. Trade agreements of the size we're talking about take years to work out though, and during that time, the UK will still need to import things and a market for exporting their products. Plenty of time for massive damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm personally quite happy with the results. Of course there will be several problems for the next few months/years, but that's true of most big decisions.

I'm assuming you voted Leave. What was it that decided it for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to be racist, since anything can be considered racist/sexist/evil if people don't like it,

But I remember hearing about how there was a great amount of immigrants moving to UK because it had a law that required it to accept immigrants from other EU countries, can I get a fact check on this?

Also continuing from above, was it not that a certain nationality was starting to build up in certain areas of the UK, IIRC, and acts that can be considered as terroristic was happening and it was being defended by the group of immigrants that moved there. So Brexit should be good in the context that it can get rid of this problem, of course it will acquire more problems as well.

If the above is true, would it not be good to secure your country by stopping immigration and especially of those who poses a threat to your country and it's people?

Of course there will be collateral damage of all sorts, but does not all action?

Looking at it from a non-economic stand point, does it not seem good to those of origin?

Like I get that racism is bad, but that doesn't mean every culture or person should be or need to be defended.

Also wasn't there voting fraud? Why is voting fraud appearing so frequently lately?

Thanks in advance for any clarification!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opinion about topic: I don't enough about it to make an informed one.

People who want to leave their thoughts: Please answer the simple question of "why did you want Britain to leave/remain?" when posting your reaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. But in return, most all British citizens likewise had the right to move to any other EEA country. There's also the argument that EEA immigration was a net positive for the UK economically as many migrants filled unpopular labor niches and were younger workers who paid more into the welfare state than they took out. They also shared a closer cultural heritage than many non-EU migrants and some, such as the Poles, were I think ultimately perceived to be assimilating quite well (though this is subjective). Of course overall this is a complex issue. Though I'll note non-EU immigration continued to rise even though the UK had control over that.

The terrorism concern is tricky. Imagine if New York broke away from the US and set up border controls to stop terrorists from moving in after the San Bernadino attack in California. And why should New York have been letting in out-of-staters who haven't proved their economic value anyway? This is of course a terrible analogy for innumerable reasons. Please don't consider I think it actually parallels the situation with Brexit in any meaningful way. But hopefully it s at least somewhat helps attempt to illustrate how dramatic such a decision is if terrorism prevention is considered the driving issue (I don't think it was).

Edited by Wist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may insult you, treat with care:

Thank you british men, I won't come living in your "great" country like I wanted to. Not because you don't want me, but because it won't be great anymore. I'll gladly watch your economy die, xenophobic idiots.

Edited by Enaluxeme
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also continuing from above, was it not that a certain nationality was starting to build up in certain areas of the UK, IIRC, and acts that can be considered as terroristic was happening and it was being defended by the group of immigrants that moved there. So Brexit should be good in the context that it can get rid of this problem, of course it will acquire more problems as well.

If the above is true, would it not be good to secure your country by stopping immigration and especially of those who poses a threat to your country and it's people?

Of course there will be collateral damage of all sorts, but does not all action?

Looking at it from a non-economic stand point, does it not seem good to those of origin?

Like I get that racism is bad, but that doesn't mean every culture or person should be or need to be defended.

I'm not sure which you're referring to. Most of the immigrants that do come to the UK tend to be good workers and a net profit for the country, and there's few that could be said to be violent in nature, I've never heard people complain about an aggressive nature of immigrant Poles or something. The most people refer to is immigrant Muslims committing crimes, which are not a race (along with Poles), so xenophobia would probably be the better word. Even then, it has the same problems as a proposed Muslim immigration ban for the US - you generally can't tell if a person is Muslim, and then you're just racially profiling any brown immigrants because you assume they are Muslim. It's not a good idea.

Besides that, people are blaming immigrants as a scapegoat when they should be blaming the austerity and economic stranglehold that the UK government has had for the working class.

Also wasn't there voting fraud? Why is voting fraud appearing so frequently lately?

No, there wasn't. Even before the vote much of the Britain leave vote said that the referendum would be rigged, and that should show how it can tend toward conspiracy theories. Just imagine if they didn't actually win and began to complain about unfounded "voter fraud".

This may insult you, treat with care:

Thank you british men, I won't come living in your "great" country like I wanted to. Not because you don't want me, but because it won't be great anymore. I'll gladly watch your economy die, xenophobic idiots.

It's not as if we all voted for this. I'm proud to be in Edinburgh where 74.4% went to Remain, the highest in Scotland, which in itself voted for a Remain majority in all regions. I know too many French, German, Polish, etc. friends to vote otherwise, and my sister is a Muslim living in France who is unsure about how this is going to affect her. Hopefully the people that voted 'no' to Scottish independence previously will break off from that because we were promised we would be staying in the EU and just get the fuck out the union because there is clearly a political divergence. Edited by Tryhard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Food for thought:

If the sterling pound continues dropping in value next week, and the stocks of British banks continue plummeting in value, how long till the first one ends up insolvent and thus practically bankrupt? And once that happens, how will things go on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much most of the EU-relationship with Britain was good for the UK, especially since the UK didn't even have to switch to the Euro. But people don't always think in terms of what's good for the country; a lot of times they think about what's good for themselves. Immigrants were a net positive for Britain, often taking the low-wage jobs, but if you're someone without a lot of education who can only get those low-wage jobs, is it surprising you think the immigrants were stealing jobs?

It's also easy to get wrapped up in the lies when the media say they're going to unbiased and "fair" and present both sides of the argument equally even when one of those sides is partially made up of blatant lies.

People are talking about how the EU placed a lot of policymaking pressure on Britain- no shit they did! Not every country is the US; not every country can be the clear power in every deal it makes and can get their way no matter what. You have to give up some stuff to get some stuff. And by the way, the EU isn't some nebulous overlord; it's comprised of its members. Britain, as one of the more powerful members of the EU, had a significant impact on the EU's economic and social policy decision-making. Now they don't, and especially on the economic front, now they have to take whatever the EU tells them. People arguing in favour of Brexit- would you rather have Switzerland's trade agreements with the EU?

And on the topic of bailouts- I couldn't find the source for this again when I looked for it, but the UK lost more from the post-Brexit crash than it has ever given out in bailout funds combined. But yeah that's just a short-term consequence with no long-term impacts...

Edited by BBM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure which you're referring to. Most of the immigrants that do come to the UK tend to be good workers and a net profit for the country, and there's few that could be said to be violent in nature, I've never heard people complain about an aggressive nature of immigrant Poles or something. The most people refer to is immigrant Muslims committing crimes, which are not a race (along with Poles), so xenophobia would probably be the better word. Even then, it has the same problems as a proposed Muslim immigration ban for the US - you generally can't tell if a person is Muslim, and then you're just racially profiling any brown immigrants because you assume they are Muslim. It's not a good idea.

Besides that, people are blaming immigrants as a scapegoat when they should be blaming the austerity and economic stranglehold that the UK government has had for the working class.

You could say that I was specifically referring to the Islamic community. Basically the gist of it is that there is this type of hatred for the GLBT group because of religion; resulting in said group to be afraid or wary of said people. It's true that it is bad to racially profile anyone for the color of their skin, but it's difficult not to when you're afraid that you can die for being GLBT. Although based on accents and clothing, you should be hinted on what their origin is. It also goes on that the problem is not actually ever dealt with by the government, often covering things up by banning guns or labeling the group as peace seeking. I believe women are also not seen as highly, so they may be targeted next if uncontained hatred and conflicts prolong, but that's just a theory.

Not all culture are the same, there are those that commit more crimes than others. It does seem racist, but that's stats. All lives matter, but if a culture cannot change or assimilate then some things cannot be considered racist.

I don't think people are blaming all immigrants, but there are certain groups, Islamic, that does pose a threat to other groups. Of course not all are looking to kill any gay they see, but mostly those of immigrants have a larger hate and acceptance for gay death from what I recall. For those that assimilate then it's fine, but for those that contradicts or don't then things can only get worst. There are other people, but this group is the one I've heard the most of recently.

From my understanding, it seems like the Brexit is a great thing for those of the GLBT community it that in drives away potential threats that causes death. Of course to those that have to leave, it's a lost and it may ruin their lives. There cannot be a victory for both sides, but there is a greater gain for those of multiple variety at the cost of many. It's important to understand why people do as they do, and I believe that a decent portion of the votes to leave was because of what I talked about. There are those that choose to stay, but remember that PC culture or SJW are not that great and does contribute to blind voting as well.

Economically speaking, there will be lost but if the trade continues with the EU then it should still maintain stability. Of course, the EU might make a show of the UK to make sure other countries don't leave. Now how this affects third or second world countries is something that is more interesting to me on the economic level.

It's good to see many views from many perspectives because it helps you understand why people did something, of course the ones I talked about is mostly non-economic.

Thus it is that I can't really say if I support or not, because I have not spent time with the immigrant community of the UK to understand the conditions and to see if this outcome will result in more good in the future.

I can only ask questions and give information I know, but just remember these song lyrics.

"People that support me mixed in with more people that support me and say nice things. Rainbows all around me, there is no shame in my safe space..." -South Park Cartman

"You cannot stop me from getting inside, I am cold and I am hard and my name ... is Reality." -South Park Reality

Edited by Hli Tshiab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could say that I was specifically referring to the Islamic community. Basically the gist of it is that there is this type of hatred for the GLBT group because of religion; resulting in said group to be afraid or wary of said people. It's true that it is bad to racially profile anyone for the color of their skin, but it's difficult not to when you're afraid that you can die for being GLBT. Although based on accents and clothing, you should be hinted on what their origin is. It also goes on that the problem is not actually ever dealt with by the government, often covering things up by banning guns or labeling the group as peace seeking. I believe women are also not seen as highly, so they may be targeted next if uncontained hatred and conflicts prolong, but that's just a theory.

Not all culture are the same, there are those that commit more crimes than others. It does seem racist, but that's stats. All lives matter, but if a culture cannot change or assimilate then some things cannot be considered racist.

I don't think people are blaming all immigrants, but there are certain groups, Islamic, that does pose a threat to other groups. Of course not all are looking to kill any gay they see, but mostly those of immigrants have a larger hate and acceptance for gay death from what I recall. For those that assimilate then it's fine, but for those that contradicts or don't then things can only get worst. There are other people, but this group is the one I've heard the most of recently.

From my understanding, it seems like the Brexit is a great thing for those of the GLBT community it that in drives away potential threats that causes death. Of course to those that have to leave, it's a lost and it may ruin their lives. There cannot be a victory for both sides, but there is a greater gain for those of multiple variety at the cost of many. It's important to understand why people do as they do, and I believe that a decent portion of the votes to leave was because of what I talked about. There are those that choose to stay, but remember that PC culture or SJW are not that great and does contribute to blind voting as well.

Economically speaking, there will be lost but if the trade continues with the EU then it should still maintain stability. Of course, the EU might make a show of the UK to make sure other countries don't leave. Now how this affects third or second world countries is something that is more interesting to me on the economic level.

It's good to see many views from many perspectives because it helps you understand why people did something, of course the ones I talked about is mostly non-economic.

Thus it is that I can't really say if I support or not, because I have not spent time with the immigrant community of the UK to understand the conditions and to see if this outcome will result in more good in the future.

I can only ask questions and give information I know, but just remember these song lyrics.

"People that support me mixed in with more people that support me and say nice things. Rainbows all around me, there is no shame in my safe space..." -South Park Cartman

"You cannot stop me from getting inside, I am cold and I am hard and my name ... is Reality." -South Park Reality

i hope you don't mind if i take this quote and frame it in a picture?

but yes, thank you, i have to say that yes I am worried about whenever i see some dude in a turban because i know there's a chance if i said or did the wrong thing, i could be killed for my sexuality, and i'm terrified that some people would rather side with my potential killer then the potential murder victim because that would be "politically correct".

i mean, its really hard to not see the world like this when the world isn't giving you the benefit of doubt, i'm almost certain the people that think like this are not harassed homosexual's like myself.

then you got people that refuse to believe "you know what, maybe bad things do happen to people because other people are just bad".

yeah off topic reply here i know, but i just really loved this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if its the EFSM the UK doesn't pay anything for it, because EFSM is a mechanism where the EU lends money for a (euro) member state in financial trouble. Essentially it takes on the role of a guarantor. The only case where member states end up paying for it, is when the country the money was lent to (partially) defaults. And even then, that goes off the EU budget, and it doesn't affect membership fees, so at best member states pay for it in a very indirect way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving up freedom of religion is not something I'm prepared to entertain. That, and the statistics are actually vastly exaggerated, I was saying just what people thought even though I disagree with it completely. The government has always had the ability to investigate extremist rhetoric and this decision changes nothing about that.

Also, it is absolutely incorrect to claim that the anti-immigration was because of LGBT fears. It is mostly based on the fact that many low income/low educated areas chose to leave, in which immigrants (mostly white, because EU immigrants...) have to take a lot of those low-wage jobs with enthusiasm, leading to resentment from the working class as a wrong target for their frustration. Any LGBT feelings are in the smallest minority (remember, this is a right-wing decision and they don't tend to have the best opinion of LGBT people to begin with anyway, in fact there were the equivalent of neo-nazis directly supporting the leave movement) and the result will not affect how they are treated significantly.

It's nothing to do with being PC or SJW or whatever nonsense.

Edited by Tryhard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(remember, this is a right-wing decision and they don't tend to have the best opinion of LGBT people to begin with anyway, in fact there were the equivalent of neo-nazis directly supporting the leave movement)

How is support for national sovereignty, unfettered by the whims of busybody bureaucrats, "right wing". Let's be clear on this: The European Union is a collectivist nightmare, and opposition to that is not automatically on the fringes of the economic spectrum. To say so is to suggest that a majority of voters in the referendum are right wing or have been co-opted by the right wing, which is precisely the sort of elitist snobbery that led to folks wanting to leave the EU in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is support for national sovereignty, unfettered by the whims of busybody bureaucrats, "right wing". Let's be clear on this: The European Union is a collectivist nightmare, and opposition to that is not automatically on the fringes of the economic spectrum. To say so is to suggest that a majority of voters in the referendum are right wing or have been co-opted by the right wing, which is precisely the sort of elitist snobbery that led to folks wanting to leave the EU in the first place.

You've not been paying attention. While there is definitely populist leftists voting for things such as national sovereighty, the fact remains that it is still mainly a right-wing movement and I doubt many 'leave' voters would disagree with that. Why is that? The main argument for it is not because of national sovereighty (which we could argue for either way), but because of anti-immigration, and a rejection of social liberalism and multiculturism.

I have no problem with populist (whether they are misguided in their appeals to the common people or not) left-wingers who voted to leave, just stating that it is mainly a right-wing decision.

Take a look at this image posted previously from XeKr.

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Ill-vs-Good-768x757.jpg

Edit: I'll also say that Scotland are known for being far more left-wing compared to England, and we voted overwhelmingly to stay over England, who voted predominately to leave, population percentages noted.

Edited by Tryhard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...