BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

bendertherobot

TheBigBean wrote:

Better off or not works at a number of levels: Europe as a whole, UK as a country, class / smaller groups and on a personal level.

There are some people in the EU who think about the first although not that many in the UK.

What seems to be missed by a large chunk of the educated and wealthy is that what may be worse for the UK is perceived to be better for some individuals and it is this that will determine their vote. Immigration being an example of one such point.

Which is fine. If that perception has truth behind it. So one needs to understand the effect of immigration and its effect on the pound in their pocket. But perception is everything if a person feels that the country is full.

surrey_commuter

TheBigBean wrote:

Better off or not works at a number of levels: Europe as a whole, UK as a country, class / smaller groups and on a personal level.

There are some people in the EU who think about the first although not that many in the UK.

What seems to be missed by a large chunk of the educated and wealthy is that what may be worse for the UK is perceived to be better for some individuals and it is this that will determine their vote. Immigration being an example of one such point.

They are basing their vote on micro level factors such a pressure on education and health services in the local community. What they don't get is that if the economy slows down then they will be even more financial pressure that will outweigh the benefits of fewer migrants.

More migrants work in the NHS than use it yet migrant pressure on the NHS will be used as a reason to leave.

bobmcstuff

Joelsim wrote:

It'll be hilarious when some of the heartland of the vote for Leave get their benefits cut by those masters of care running the campaign.

Oh and destroy the NHS. Let's not forget.

https://twitter.com/guardian/status/739400328521617408

Given Gove and other leading Leave campaigners have previously argued for privatising the NHS I find it very, very difficult to take him seriously when he says we would spend £350m/week on the NHS. I don't get how anyone else could either.

finchy

bobmcstuff wrote:

Given Gove and other leading Leave campaigners have previously argued for privatising the NHS I find it very, very difficult to take him seriously when he says we would spend £350m/week on the NHS. I don't get how anyone else could either.

It's because they don't have a f'king clue.

joelsim

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Better off or not works at a number of levels: Europe as a whole, UK as a country, class / smaller groups and on a personal level.

There are some people in the EU who think about the first although not that many in the UK.

What seems to be missed by a large chunk of the educated and wealthy is that what may be worse for the UK is perceived to be better for some individuals and it is this that will determine their vote. Immigration being an example of one such point.

They are basing their vote on micro level factors such a pressure on education and health services in the local community. What they don't get is that if the economy slows down then they will be even more financial pressure that will outweigh the benefits of fewer migrants.

More migrants work in the NHS than use it yet migrant pressure on the NHS will be used as a reason to leave.

^This.

But almost none of them get it (if any at all).

Definitely some reasons for changing the voting structure so that you have to be at least as intelligent as a labrador to qualify.

surrey_commuter

Joelsim wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Better off or not works at a number of levels: Europe as a whole, UK as a country, class / smaller groups and on a personal level.

There are some people in the EU who think about the first although not that many in the UK.

What seems to be missed by a large chunk of the educated and wealthy is that what may be worse for the UK is perceived to be better for some individuals and it is this that will determine their vote. Immigration being an example of one such point.

They are basing their vote on micro level factors such a pressure on education and health services in the local community. What they don't get is that if the economy slows down then they will be even more financial pressure that will outweigh the benefits of fewer migrants.

More migrants work in the NHS than use it yet migrant pressure on the NHS will be used as a reason to leave.

^This.

But almost none of them get it (if any at all).

Definitely some reasons for changing the voting structure so that you have to be at least as intelligent as a labrador to qualify.

Or young enough to have to live with the consequences.

The public should never have been given a vote on something they don't understand

joelsim

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Better off or not works at a number of levels: Europe as a whole, UK as a country, class / smaller groups and on a personal level.

There are some people in the EU who think about the first although not that many in the UK.

What seems to be missed by a large chunk of the educated and wealthy is that what may be worse for the UK is perceived to be better for some individuals and it is this that will determine their vote. Immigration being an example of one such point.

They are basing their vote on micro level factors such a pressure on education and health services in the local community. What they don't get is that if the economy slows down then they will be even more financial pressure that will outweigh the benefits of fewer migrants.

More migrants work in the NHS than use it yet migrant pressure on the NHS will be used as a reason to leave.

^This.

But almost none of them get it (if any at all).

Definitely some reasons for changing the voting structure so that you have to be at least as intelligent as a labrador to qualify.

Or young enough to have to live with the consequences.

The public should never have been given a vote on something they don't understand

Totally and utterly agree. Having the ignorant and xenophobic deciding to halve my pension or stop my kids' opportunities is really grating on me.

surrey_commuter

Joelsim wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Better off or not works at a number of levels: Europe as a whole, UK as a country, class / smaller groups and on a personal level.

There are some people in the EU who think about the first although not that many in the UK.

What seems to be missed by a large chunk of the educated and wealthy is that what may be worse for the UK is perceived to be better for some individuals and it is this that will determine their vote. Immigration being an example of one such point.

They are basing their vote on micro level factors such a pressure on education and health services in the local community. What they don't get is that if the economy slows down then they will be even more financial pressure that will outweigh the benefits of fewer migrants.

More migrants work in the NHS than use it yet migrant pressure on the NHS will be used as a reason to leave.

^This.

But almost none of them get it (if any at all).

Definitely some reasons for changing the voting structure so that you have to be at least as intelligent as a labrador to qualify.

Or young enough to have to live with the consequences.

The public should never have been given a vote on something they don't understand

Totally and utterly agree. Having the ignorant and xenophobic deciding to halve my pension or stop my kids' opportunities is really grating on me.

And the fact that they will suffer more does not cheer me up

joelsim

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

TheBigBean wrote:

Better off or not works at a number of levels: Europe as a whole, UK as a country, class / smaller groups and on a personal level.

There are some people in the EU who think about the first although not that many in the UK.

What seems to be missed by a large chunk of the educated and wealthy is that what may be worse for the UK is perceived to be better for some individuals and it is this that will determine their vote. Immigration being an example of one such point.

They are basing their vote on micro level factors such a pressure on education and health services in the local community. What they don't get is that if the economy slows down then they will be even more financial pressure that will outweigh the benefits of fewer migrants.

More migrants work in the NHS than use it yet migrant pressure on the NHS will be used as a reason to leave.

^This.

But almost none of them get it (if any at all).

Definitely some reasons for changing the voting structure so that you have to be at least as intelligent as a labrador to qualify.

Or young enough to have to live with the consequences.

The public should never have been given a vote on something they don't understand

Totally and utterly agree. Having the ignorant and xenophobic deciding to halve my pension or stop my kids' opportunities is really grating on me.

And the fact that they will suffer more does not cheer me up

Nope. Nor me in reality. Ironic.

Bo Duke

I have been contemplating overnight.

I don't want to see the UK leave because commercially we derive great benefit from being part of the EU

I don't want to stay in the EU because it refuses to reform it's governance, political and economic policies and continued integration strategy.

But putting all aside, aren't the key issues in both cases the failure of GOVERNMENTS that has taken us to this point?

Brussels is not transparent, they've failed to create trust basis what they've shoved through in the past, is currently in debate and their future plans. Where there is no trust there is no support.

Successive UK governments have failed to project the electorate's views strongly enough to Brussels leading to mistrust and frustration. Equally, I don't believe governments have promoted the EU sufficiently, explained its policies, debated what works and what doesn't and provided an alternative.

Boris is singing off the back of a fag packet, he has no idea what will happen next week if we vote out, nor Cameron if we vote in. Our governments (and those before) have never made the EU a priority and suddenly we're staring down the barrel of a gun not because we necessarily want to leave but because of chronic mismanagement by POLITICIANS.

This isn't europe's fault, this is politicians fault.

They've screwed it up for 20 years and they're desperate we don't punish the country and EU for THEIR failings.

pblakeney

I 100% agree with the above. However we only get who we elect so we are equally culpable.
People need to get off their arses and either stand, or vote for someone worthwhile.

surrey_commuter

Historically turnout has been hit by bad weather - it is like a monsoon here

Bo Duke

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Historically turnout has been hit by bad weather - it is like a monsoon here

So the southern softy Remain voters will stay at home...!

mr_goo

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Historically turnout has been hit by bad weather - it is like a monsoon here

So the southern softy Remain voters will stay at home...!

Nope. Bit of wet stuff won't stop me from trying to redefine the UK's destiny and that of the other slave nations of the EU.

rick_chasey

Mr Goo wrote:

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Historically turnout has been hit by bad weather - it is like a monsoon here

So the southern softy Remain voters will stay at home...!

Nope. Bit of wet stuff won't stop me from trying to redefine the UK's destiny and that of the other slave nations of the EU.

Such a slave it can have its own referendum to decide said destiny :roll:.

mr_goo

Rick Chasey wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Historically turnout has been hit by bad weather - it is like a monsoon here

So the southern softy Remain voters will stay at home...!

Nope. Bit of wet stuff won't stop me from trying to redefine the UK's destiny and that of the other slave nations of the EU.

Such a slave it can have its own referendum to decide said destiny :roll:.

Very interesting interview with a Latvian on the radio yesterday, who said that the EU hasn't worked for her country. Wages very low but prices very high, due to the taxes/VAT et all imposed by the EU. But hey what do we know, all is rosey in the garden of Junker ain't it?

The vote is not binding anyway Rick. The majority of the House of Commons is in the Remain camp including the illustrious Rt Hon Cameron. I do not think that implementing article 50 in the event of a Leave result will be straight forward as us Little Englanders imagine. As I have said before, I think that a narrow Leave victory will be declared indecisive.

surrey_commuter

Mr Goo wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Historically turnout has been hit by bad weather - it is like a monsoon here

So the southern softy Remain voters will stay at home...!

Nope. Bit of wet stuff won't stop me from trying to redefine the UK's destiny and that of the other slave nations of the EU.

Such a slave it can have its own referendum to decide said destiny :roll:.

Very interesting interview with a Latvian on the radio yesterday, who said that the EU hasn't worked for her country. Wages very low but prices very high, due to the taxes/VAT et all imposed by the EU. But hey what do we know, all is rosey in the garden of Junker ain't it?

The vote is not binding anyway Rick. The majority of the House of Commons is in the Remain camp including the illustrious Rt Hon Cameron. I do not think that implementing article 50 in the event of a Leave result will be straight forward as us Little Englanders imagine. As I have said before, I think that a narrow Leave victory will be declared indecisive.

Bizarrely I agree with you - I am hearing whispers (strong and well sourced but still whispers) that "they" are exploring all options for saving people from their own stupidity.
"

surrey_commuter

Bo Duke wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Historically turnout has been hit by bad weather - it is like a monsoon here

So the southern softy Remain voters will stay at home...!

i thought you were in?

I have been contemplating overnight.

I don't want to see the UK leave because commercially we derive great benefit from being part of the EU

ddraver

Should ve asked for my final paycheck last week so i could have transferred it all into GBP...

surrey_commuter

ddraver wrote:

Should ve asked for my final paycheck last week so i could have transferred it all into GBP...

see it as a hedge - if the turkeys vote for Xmas you could be 10% better off - every cloud

veronese68

Interesting thing I just read. If you're still really not sure you should vote in. We can leave at any point in the future if we decide. If we leave now and change our minds we cannot just rejoin with the same terms. We would need approval from all the other member countries and would lose our rebate and have to conform to rules we currently have exemption from.
So a vote to remain in the EU is keeping options open. A vote to leave is closing doors.

surrey_commuter

in its own way this is quite amusing

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicd ... y-chart-15

bendertherobot

Yep. Surprised more hasn't been made of it. The converse is also true. But, practically, not.

Say we want a way back. We'd apply to join. Would we even meet the accession requirements? Would we get a majority approval? After the way we behaved?

surrey_commuter

Veronese68 wrote:

Interesting thing I just read. If you're still really not sure you should vote in. We can leave at any point in the future if we decide. If we leave now and change our minds we cannot just rejoin with the same terms. We would need approval from all the other member countries and would lose our rebate and have to conform to rules we currently have exemption from.
So a vote to remain in the EU is keeping options open. A vote to leave is closing doors.

and we would have to commit to joining the Euro

we would never re-join on those terms - once we are out we are out

oh and we would have to rely on none of the other members vetoing our applicatio

bendertherobot

Oh yeah, forgot about that. My head was nagging me about something.

Anyhow, from twitter, if you're voting to remain with your head but to leave with your heart, remember that one of them is for thinking and the other is a pump.

TheBigBean

Surrey Commuter wrote:

in its own way this is quite amusing

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicd ... y-chart-15

The problem is though that sometimes it feels like a propaganda machine. For example, they debunk the great myth that most of the budget is spent on farmers when in fact it is only 30% plus 9% on rural development. This doesn't really inspire confidence.

http://ec.europa.eu/budget/explained/myths/myths_en.cfm

Most of the EU budget goes to farmers !

Wrong.

In 1985, around 70% of the EU budget went on agriculture. In 2013, direct aid to farmers and market-related expenditure amounted to just 30% of the budget, and rural development spending to 9%. Over the past decade, 13 countries - most of them with large farming sectors – have joined the EU. Yet the common agricultural policy budget has not risen to cover these extra costs. In fact, spending continues to fall.

Agriculture's relatively large share of the EU budget is entirely justified; it is the only policy funded almost entirely from the budget. This means that EU spending replaces national expenditure to a large extent.

The common agriculture policy is constantly developing. Successive reforms have replaced support for production by direct income support for farmers, provided they comply with certain health and environmental standards, and support to projects designed to encourage economic activity in rural areas.

The 2014 reform:

makes direct payments fairer and greener
strengthens the position of farmers within the food production chain
makes the common agriculture policy more efficient and more transparent.

surrey_commuter

TheBigBean wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

in its own way this is quite amusing

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicd ... y-chart-15

The problem is though that sometimes it feels like a propaganda machine. For example, they debunk the great myth that most of the budget is spent on farmers when in fact it is only 30% plus 9% on rural development. This doesn't really inspire confidence.

http://ec.europa.eu/budget/explained/myths/myths_en.cfm

Most of the EU budget goes to farmers !

Wrong.

In 1985, around 70% of the EU budget went on agriculture. In 2013, direct aid to farmers and market-related expenditure amounted to just 30% of the budget, and rural development spending to 9%. Over the past decade, 13 countries - most of them with large farming sectors – have joined the EU. Yet the common agricultural policy budget has not risen to cover these extra costs. In fact, spending continues to fall.

Agriculture's relatively large share of the EU budget is entirely justified; it is the only policy funded almost entirely from the budget. This means that EU spending replaces national expenditure to a large extent.

The common agriculture policy is constantly developing. Successive reforms have replaced support for production by direct income support for farmers, provided they comply with certain health and environmental standards, and support to projects designed to encourage economic activity in rural areas.

The 2014 reform:

makes direct payments fairer and greener
strengthens the position of farmers within the food production chain
makes the common agriculture policy more efficient and more transparent.

I am not sure I can cope with a farming subsidies debate but will throw out there that the landed gentry in the UK have skewed our share of the payments so that they get the lions share. One of the biggest beneficiaries is the Duchy of Cornwall!!

coopster_the_1st

Veronese68 wrote:

Interesting thing I just read. If you're still really not sure you should vote in. We can leave at any point in the future if we decide. If we leave now and change our minds we cannot just rejoin with the same terms. We would need approval from all the other member countries and would lose our rebate and have to conform to rules we currently have exemption from.
So a vote to remain in the EU is keeping options open. A vote to leave is closing doors.

We will never be given another referendum (unless we vote to leave today) as the politicians have proved how out of touch they are with the electorate and how they are all pro Europe. They will not risk their power being questioned again.

The only way we will leave going forward is by voting in a right wing government and for that to the be the case that would be UKIP. Shudder!

As has been highlighted constantly through this vote, be careful what you wish for!

Jez mon

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Interesting thing I just read. If you're still really not sure you should vote in. We can leave at any point in the future if we decide. If we leave now and change our minds we cannot just rejoin with the same terms. We would need approval from all the other member countries and would lose our rebate and have to conform to rules we currently have exemption from.
So a vote to remain in the EU is keeping options open. A vote to leave is closing doors.

We will never be given another referendum (unless we vote to leave today) as the politicians have proved how out of touch they are with the electorate and how they are all pro Europe. They will not risk their power being questioned again.

The only way we will leave going forward is by voting in a right wing government and for that to the be the case that would be UKIP. Shudder!

As has been highlighted constantly through this vote, be careful what you wish for!

Have you missed two of the biggest politicians in the Tory party, who have been campaigning relentlessly for leave??

Ultimately, offering a membership referendum is going to be a vote winner, so politicians will probably continue to strongly consider having it in their manifesto...

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Interesting thing I just read. If you're still really not sure you should vote in. We can leave at any point in the future if we decide. If we leave now and change our minds we cannot just rejoin with the same terms. We would need approval from all the other member countries and would lose our rebate and have to conform to rules we currently have exemption from.
So a vote to remain in the EU is keeping options open. A vote to leave is closing doors.

We will never be given another referendum (unless we vote to leave today) as the politicians have proved how out of touch they are with the electorate and how they are all pro Europe. They will not risk their power being questioned again.

The only way we will leave going forward is by voting in a right wing government and for that to the be the case that would be UKIP. Shudder!

As has been highlighted constantly through this vote, be careful what you wish for!

The electorate has proven to be incapable of making an informed decision on Brexit - they should not be asked to vote on issues such as this ever again