News BREXIT - more good than bad or more bad than good?

[StevieTNZ]

And so it ends

Yup... now for the markets close to opening to react

 

[WWGD]

Yup... now for the markets close to opening to react

And ultimately, maybe seeing if there is a new referendum in Scotland with its own leave option.

 

[mheslep]

Amazing. Bold move by the Brits.

Cameron's conciliatory statements very statesman-like.

 

[jtbell]

Looks like Scotland is heading towards a second independence referendum. It voted 62% in favor of staying in the EU.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36621030

Nicola Sturgeon said it was "democratically unacceptable" that Scotland faced the prospect of being taken out of the EU against its will.

She said the Scottish government would begin preparing legislation to enable another independence vote.

 

[mheslep]

Looks like Scotland is heading towards a second independence referendum. It voted 62% in favor of staying in the EU.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36621030

Unlikely. Scottish independence went down by 400 thousand votes, knowing at the time the UK might leave the EU.

A vote by 30 million people is "Democratically unacceptable"? Please.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Amazing. Bold move by the Brits.

Some might call it bold, others might call it foolhardy.

http://www.economist.com/news/leade...ns-senseless-self-inflicted-blow-tragic-split

http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2016/06/prime-minister-resigns

http://www.economist.com/news/finan...-global-chilling-effect-investment-why-brexit

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Scotland is going to try for independence again to re-enter EU. Amazing change in the area.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ged-EU-against-says-furious-Alex-Salmond.html

 

[Jonathan Scott]

A vote by 30 million people is "Democratically unacceptable"? Please.

The bit that's difficult to accept is that the democratic decision was made based on a large amount of provably misleading information from both sides. All that I could be sure of was that leaving would definitely cause some major trouble (as is becoming apparent in Ireland and Scotland) and that both sides had made extremely misleading statements. In addition, despite being fed up with many aspects of the way the EU works, I feel that working together to solve problems is better than working separately, and hoping that we can hide from Europe's problems by cutting ourselves off seems very unrealistic.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Why scientists are worried about the Brexit
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601721/why-scientists-are-so-worried-about-brexit/

 

[mheslep]

The bit that's difficult to accept is that the democratic decision was made based on a large amount of provably misleading information from both sides.

Certainly misleading information is often present, but how is it know that this particular outcome was *based on* misleading information?

All that I could be sure of was that leaving would definitely cause some major trouble (as is becoming apparent in Ireland and Scotland)

As was remaining likely to cause (more) trouble (e.g. the rise of the BNP, EDL, Left Unity, Class War, ...)

cutting ourselves off seems very unrealistic.

I have no comment on the best method of cooperation, but the UK is hardly cut-off from Europe post exit. The EFTA exists, the EEA and NATO remain, The Chunnel will not be plugged.

 

[Orodruin]

Unlikely. Scottish independence went down by 400 thousand votes, knowing at the time the UK might leave the EU.

But hardly believing that UK would. One of the main arguments for the no to Scottish independence was the prospect of staying within the European Union. The SNP was recently reelected on a manifesto of providing a fast possibility of holding a new referendum under drastically changed circumstances - and Brexit certainly would qualify for that. If I was Scottish, I certainly would have voted no to independence in 2014, but yes today.

and that both sides had made extremely misleading statements.

I believe this to be one of the great flaws of democracy, in particular of big important referendums. People will tend to believe the truths that seem convenient for them and vote accordingly - greatly benefitting sides that can draw up such "easy" arguments and also implying that many people voting will not have the time nor interest in delving deeper into what are often very complex issues. This is the entire point behind parliamentarism, electing officials to do just that and to take informed decisions. To push the most important issues where many people will vote according to their gut feeling to a referendum is not a brilliant idea from this perspective.

 

[Mark44]

I'm voting Remain. It's ridiculous to leave, it would be economic suicide.

I'm sure there were people in 1776 who said the same thing about America leaving. It was tough at first, but we made a go of it.

Not to mention that the leaders of the Leave campaign are just banging an ideological drum of "Immigration! Sovereignty! Nationalism!"

Points that resonated with a majority of voters. The first two alone would have been enough for me to vote "Leave." With regard to sovreignty, having to abide by onerous rules and regulations from a bunch of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels would convince me to bail at the first opportunity.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

Nigel Farage has just said that the suggestion painted on the Vote Leave "battle bus" that £350 million a week being paid to the EU could be paid instead to support the national health service was "a mistake": http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/36624697

In fact, it had already been established that the amount actually paid to the EU was much less than that, because of a rebate agreement, and this amount doesn't take any account of the amount that the EU pays back to the UK in many different ways (farm subsidies, development, research funding etc.), so the net cost was very much less.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

.. and even though the amount was actually much less than that, surveys showed that nearly half of Britons believed it:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-million-a-week-to-the-eu-claim-a7085016.html

So given that the margin of victory was only a few percent, it looks as if that particular lie may well have contributed significantly to the result.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Points that resonated with a majority of voters. The first two alone would have been enough for me to vote "Leave." With regard to sovreignty, having to abide by onerous rules and regulations from a bunch of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels would convince me to bail at the first opportunity.

Mark44, am I to take it from your quote above that you are opposed to immigration, then?

 

[gleem]

So is it true that a good number of Brits did not know what the EU was?

 

[mister mishka]

Overall I think the outcome for the UK to leave the EU is more bad than good, it will hurt both sides (and will probably hurt the UK more in the long run). Yes it is not the end of the world and I am sure that they will recover, but it feels like they are going much more backwards than forwards. This narrow-mindedness does not last longterm and nor is it capable of solving the actual issues! These issues are not unique to the UK, these are WORLD issues!

That being said, I do see this as a wake up call for the EU and am happy about that. They need to do more and not just idle by, to take action when it is needed. The world needs more cooperation / understanding, to see the bigger picture; how else are we ever going to solve these basic issues that are common to ALL of us in this world?

Anyways I predict that its going to be very tough times for the UK financially, overall worse than what it has been and for at least some years into the future. Scotland and Ireland most likely will leave the UK and join the EU (why not?). The EU might loose another country with another type of referendum vote (Holland for example), but that depends on the results of what the UK actually becomes within the next few months. Maybe we get Donald Trump and Boris Johnson as new world powers too, that will at least shake things up in the world (and hopefully we get something new / greater; that is, from the pieces left behind after their reign).

Lastly I agree with previous posts about the flaws of democracy, though it still seems like the best system currently out there. Though the masses will inevitably / instinctively know what the right thing to do is after they feel the hurt. I don't think the lesson will be nearly as severe as it was during WWII for example, but history seems still to repeat itself in some way or another. Maybe that is just the growing pains of civilizations, but we have yet to become that civilization that can put aside our petty differences and tackle the bigger concerns outside our small little Earth :PPS, I am Norwegian and this Brexit is nothing like being like Norway. Not only were we lucky with a lot of oil, but spent DECADES investing that wealth into the future of our country. It is not something the UK can replicate that quickly, especially now after opting out of the EU! Yes Norway is in the EEA / EFTA, but one of its policies is the "Free Movement of Persons" to be able to join (see link below). Now wasn't one of the main points of Brexit for the UK to have control of its borders? Thus renders this option also a complete impossibility! So please don't compare it to Norway, we are now more connected to the EU than the UK now ever will be!

http://www.efta.int/eea/policy-areas/persons/persons

 

[Mark44]

Mark44, am I to take it from your quote above that you are opposed to immigration, then?

I didn't say that, and you shouldn't infer it. Relative to my own country, the US, I am opposed to illegal immigration. Regarding immigration to Europe and the UK, if I were to have a vote, I would be against immigration in numbers too large to be assimilated into the particular country. With the massive influx of emigres lately, several of the countries, among them Hungary and, as I recall, Slovakia, are rethinking the idea of open borders.

 

[gleem]

The British are frantically Googling what the E.U. is, hours after voting to leave it. Really? http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-british-are-frantically-googling-what-the-eu-is-hours-after-voting-to-leave-it/ar-AAhAdn5?li=BBnbcA1

This may be one reason why the founding fathers of the USA decided on a democratic republic (representiave democracy) rather than a pure democracy, truly understanding the situation that they are voting on..

 

[mheslep]

But hardly believing that UK would. One of the main arguments for the no to Scottish independence was the prospect of staying within the European Union...

I had forgotten about that possibility, that the EU would keep out an independent Scotland. Good point.

 

[mheslep]

.. and even though the amount was actually much less than that, surveys showed that nearly half of Britons believed it:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-million-a-week-to-the-eu-claim-a7085016.html

So given that the margin of victory was only a few percent, it looks as if that particular lie may well have contributed significantly to the result.

The amount actually sent to the EU by the UK government, taken out of the hands of the UK Parliament, appears to be 250 million per week (13 billion a year). Do you think that figure would have been found modest by woud be Leave voters? Also, the Leave campaign mentions "costs" where I look, not government spending per se, so they may be referring to other monies leaving Britain due to the EU, possibly fines, licensing on business.

https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/

 

[rootone]

Before anything else happens the UK needs a new prime minister.
Cameron has resigned, and presumably will be replaced by a pro-leaving person who will then invoke EU article 50.
That person will be decided by the Tory party, since they are defacto the governing party in the UK since the last general election.
All the possible candidates seem horrifying to me, (even though Cameron is a bit of a dipstick, imo)

However you analyse it, the populace of the UK have voted for a sharp right turn,and personally I think it could get ugly and am glad I no longer live there.

 

[Orodruin]

With regard to sovreignty, having to abide by onerous rules and regulations from a bunch of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels would convince me to bail at the first opportunity.

The thing that they did not tell the voters is that Brittish companies will have to abide by the regulations anyway if they want to trade with the EU.

Lastly I agree with previous posts about the flaws of democracy, though it still seems like the best system currently out there.

Yes, do not get me wrong. I think it is far superior to any other form of government mankind has tried. (Take monarchy for example, if being at the mercy of the majority is bad, being at the mercy of a single person that might be excruciatingly unfit to rule would be worse.) I am just saying it has some gaping flaws.

 

[Jonathan Scott]

The amount actually sent to the EU by the UK government, taken out of the hands of the UK Parliament, appears to be 250 million per week (13 billion a year). Do you think that figure would have been found modest by woud be Leave voters? Also, the Leave campaign mentions "costs" where I look, not government spending per se, so they may be referring to other monies leaving Britain due to the EU, possibly fines, licensing on business.

https://fullfact.org/europe/our-eu-membership-fee-55-million/

The advertisements made it seem that the net cost of being a member of the EU was £350 million a week which could have been spent on the NHS instead. As stated on the quoted fact-checking site, that was ignoring the rebate, and also ignored all EU payments back to the UK, so it wasn't really the actual cost. In addition to those payments, there are services provided by the EU which the UK would otherwise have to provide itself, but it's difficult to estimate those. However, it's not the specific amount which is the biggest lie; it's the suggestion that if we left the EU that amount of additional money could be spent on the NHS, which is ludicrous.

 

[Vanadium 50]

The thing that they did not tell the voters is that Brittish companies will have to abide by the regulations anyway if they want to trade with the EU.

Why? Surely China, for example, trades with the EU, and nobody suggests Chinese working conditions are as good as those in the EU.

 

[Orodruin]

Why? Surely China, for example, trades with the EU, and nobody suggests Chinese working conditions are as good as those in the EU.

Not talking about working regulations. One Leave commercial featured product regulations for pillows. If Britain wants to export pillows to the EU, they will still have to abide by those regulations. (Also, many of the regulations quoted in reality had nothing to do with pillows, butt simply regulations containing the word "pillow")

 

[epenguin]

Maybe not the working conditions, but things like the safety standards and specifications, trades descriptions, etc.

 

[epenguin]

Re the various comments about democracy. British democracy, like American, is representative not direct. A national referendum has practically no tradition in Britain. It ought to be a kind of nuclear option. Invoked only for something like an important constitutional question.

Only one out of three national referendums that there have ever been in Britain have been on such a question (that was on a proposed reform of the electoral system, which failed). And likewise a referendum has been promised in the eventuality of any major session of British sovereignty to the EU, such as joining the euro.

Instead this referendum was as I mentioned earlier a piece of manoeuvring over an obscure internal Conservative Party question, admittedly concerning the EU, specifically to placate a faction generally referred to as the "swivel eyed loons" performed by a man whose only previous career was in PR and who seems to view politics and democracy as engineering and management of consensus.

To have possibly undermined and set in train the collapse of the major force for peace and progress that is the EU, and brought about the breakup of his own country would have taken villains like Hitler a lifetime; this inoffensive if somewhat shallow and insincere man, has achieved it in a year. Okay hopefully it will not come to that, but these things are on the cards and being generally commented.

 

[jim hardy]

I guess the question is moot, being that most things in politics are good for some and bad for others. Anyway, I'm still undecided. What do you think? And if you're not voting, why not?

I didn't vote because i live in US.

Did this popular sentiment affect the Brexit vote ? It's sure affecting the US election .

Spoiler: caution - conservative site

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=3410201

Nobody is placing the blame on the refugees for wanting a better life. The blame goes to the EU leadership for failing to engage the citizens in any discussion of accepting refugees, how many, and from where. They decided for all the little people that they WOULD take millions of refugees and said little people could just lump it. That is not the job of any government. The job of the government, first, foremost, and always is the protection of its citizens, not the protection of some other country's citizens. And therein lies the problem with most of the West's governments. They all think they are better and smarter than their citizens. They need to know their place and Britain has just given them a clue as to where that is.

As a "True Believer" in keeping government small, i would have voted to exit.

[George] Washington believed that with regard to foreign nations, it's best to trade freely and "have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop."

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/george-washington-isolationist/246453/

"Good Fences Make Good Neighbors" .

If Brexit starts a trend that changes foreign relations playing field from a dominance themed "Grand Chessboard"
to a mutual-self-improvement themed "Smorgasboard"
where everybody exchanges what they produce
which is what little folks want

it'll turn out good.

old jim

 

[epenguin]

Scientists are generally aghast at this development. Fortunately I think it' ought work out be not nearly as bad as they fear as I explained in #20. Here some links to discussions and within them there are many more relevant and interesting links.

http://www.nature.com/news/brexit-uk-should-remain-1.20082

http://www.nature.com/news/how-scie...-brexit-1.20158?WT.mc_id=SFB_NNEWS_1508_RHBox