Brexit - Leave or Remain

[Silent]

1 minute ago, Braivo said:

So then why the big deal to leave if it didn't matter much anyway?

I met several Brits last week while traveling in Europe, all of them that supported Brexit sited this as their main reason. A country ceases to exist once its borders become pourous. They are unwilling to hand their country over to immigrants. 

You misunderstood me. The actual facts don't seem to matter much when people are using retorics like the ones I gave you as an example. A lot of lies have been told, and when you confront people with the facts they ignore them. In other words, the facts don't matter for them, their opinion is set.

the refugees, again, GB had a vote and they voted in favour. Besides that it helps to control the big wave, also for GB. You see it as refugees forced on GB, while in fact it's taking away refugees from GB and place them in coutries like Austria, Czech and Belgium.

 

ps latest news is that the credit rating of GB is down by two steps in once to AA.

 

[Lihu]

1 hour ago, Silent said:

ps latest news is that the credit rating of GB is down by two steps in once to AA.

Of course, people vote too much with their emotions sometimes, and the rating simply reflects the stability of a nation.

[Silent]

14 hours ago, Lihu said:

Of course, people vote too much with their emotions sometimes, and the rating simply reflects the stability of a nation.

A direct result is the interest of the state's loans going up. Together with the value of the Pound going down it means UK loses more money every second compared to a week ago.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer just said the country will be poorer because of the Brexit vote:

Quote

Ensuring the UK’s fiscal stability is crucial in the wake of the referendum decision to leave the EU, said Osborne, adding that post-Brexit measures would “absolutely” include cuts in public spending and tax hikes.

"We are in a prolonged period of economic adjustment in the UK, we are adjusting to life outside the EU and it will not be as economically rosy as life inside the EU," he told BBC Radio.

I think a lot of people didn't realise last week that things like this would be the costs of their descicion. A certain group of people laughed away every warning and put it aside as something like 'you are just trying to scare me, it's noncence'. Well, it's not noncence, it's basic economics and common sence. I wouldn't be surprised that if they would do a second referendum next week, the result will be the other way around. Which in fact proves the downside of referenda in the first place, but that's a different discussion.

[newtogolf]

2 hours ago, Silent said:

A direct result is the interest of the state's loans going up. Together with the value of the Pound going down it means UK loses more money every second compared to a week ago.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer just said the country will be poorer because of the Brexit vote:

I think a lot of people didn't realise last week that things like this would be the costs of their descicion. A certain group of people laughed away every warning and put it aside as something like 'you are just trying to scare me, it's noncence'. Well, it's not noncence, it's basic economics and common sence. I wouldn't be surprised that if they would do a second referendum next week, the result will be the other way around. Which in fact proves the downside of referenda in the first place, but that's a different discussion.

I believe those that wished to exit had to know they would face some hardships early on in the exit until their economy stabilized.  

You can't just extract your country from an economic consortium of countries and not expect some downside just due to speculation alone.  It's been less than a week, it's going to take some time for the world markets to come around.  

[Abu3baid]

10 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

I believe those that wished to exit had to know they would face some hardships early on in the exit until their economy stabilized.  

You can't just extract your country from an economic consortium of countries and not expect some downside just due to speculation alone.  It's been less than a week, it's going to take some time for the world markets to come around.  

Yeah, but we all know tax hikes have a way of never finding their way down don't we?

I have a very hard time believing that they will ever be economically in a better position outside the EU than inside the EU, and that's what they need to be prepared to live with imo.

[newtogolf]

18 minutes ago, Abu3baid said:

Yeah, but we all know tax hikes have a way of never finding their way down don't we?

I have a very hard time believing that they will ever be economically in a better position outside the EU than inside the EU, and that's what they need to be prepared to live with imo.

What are you basing that on?  

Taking on all the refugees has had a major negative impact on all of the countries.  Sweden is struggling to survive after the influx of refugees and migrants.  The entry of all the migrants has stressed their infrastructure to the point where there isn't enough housing, schools, teachers, unemployment and welfare.   The impact is likely going to result in tax increases which will lead more people to want Sweden to follow the UK and exit the EU as well.  

 

[Silent]

46 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

I believe those that wished to exit had to know they would face some hardships early on in the exit until their economy stabilized.  

You can't just extract your country from an economic consortium of countries and not expect some downside just due to speculation alone.  It's been less than a week, it's going to take some time for the world markets to come around.  

I believe you might be wrong in that assumption. A lot of those warnings were laughed away. In my opinion at least a lot of people underestimated it.

3 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

What are you basing that on?  

Taking on all the refugees has had a major negative impact on all of the countries.  Sweden is struggling to survive after the influx of refugees and migrants.  The entry of all the migrants has stressed their infrastructure to the point where there isn't enough housing, schools, teachers, unemployment and welfare.   The impact is likely going to result in tax increases which will lead more people to want Sweden to follow the UK and exit the EU as well.  

 

You really believe that without EU there won't be coming refugees to the UK? Mostly from the country they are bombing themselves by the way, talking about taking responsibility. A lot of refugees want to go to Germany or England. Because of the EU refugees were also taken to other countries instead. It's quite mindblowing to me that people seem to overlook that. 

[newtogolf]

4 minutes ago, Silent said:

I believe you might be wrong in that assumption. A lot of those warnings were laughed away. In my opinion at least a lot of people underestimated it.

You really believe that without EU there won't be coming refugees to the UK? Mostly from the country they are bombing themselves by the way. A lot of refugees want to go to Germany or England. Because of the EU refugees were also taken to other countries instead. It's quite mindblowing to me that people seem to overlook that. 

It's my understanding that as part of the EU, countries were dictated the number of refugees they had to accept.  If the UK chooses to accept refugees as they move forward they will have control over how many.  

[Silent]

13 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

It's my understanding that as part of the EU, countries were dictated the number of refugees they had to accept.  If the UK chooses to accept refugees as they move forward they will have control over how many.  

As I said a few times before: GB wasn't dictated. They had a vote in it and they voted in favour. Mostly because of their own benefit, because it made it easier for them to control to wave of refugees heading for GB. This way it was more fairly devided. One could easily argue that the rest of EU is helping GB big time dealing with the refugees. 

[Gunther]

20 minutes ago, Silent said:

As I said a few times before: GB wasn't dictated. They had a vote in it and they voted in favour. Mostly because of their own benefit, because it made it easier for them to control to wave of refugees heading for GB. This way it was more fairly devided. One could easily argue that the rest of EU is helping GB big time dealing with the refugees. 

Who voted?  The beaurocrat appointed as Britain's ambassador to the EU?  British Parliament?  I haven't heard the people voted on this.

[Lihu]

1 hour ago, newtogolf said:

I believe those that wished to exit had to know they would face some hardships early on in the exit until their economy stabilized.  

You can't just extract your country from an economic consortium of countries and not expect some downside just due to speculation alone.  It's been less than a week, it's going to take some time for the world markets to come around.  

Statistically speaking, probably less than 2% who voted for Brexit fully understood the ramifications. Most people vote with their emotions pretty much blindly.

What's interesting is that the regions that voted Remain contained all the best universities in the country.

So, it's even possible it's even less than a fraction of a percent.

People voting for this type of thing for the reasons they did are voting based upon their emotions.

Personally, EU should have had a constitution. They should have just duplicated that of the United States verbatim. I also don't blame the British for voting this way.

[Silent]

33 minutes ago, Gunther said:

Who voted?  The beaurocrat appointed as Britain's ambassador to the EU?  British Parliament?  I haven't heard the people voted on this.

The country's representatives regarding this subject from the EU Parliament. And before you ask, please know that in every country there were elections to chose the ones who get a seat in the EU Parliament, so also in GB It basically is like every other descision made by government. Only Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungaria and Romania voted against it. Which is quite ironical in my opinion.

[Gunther]

6 minutes ago, Silent said:

The country's representatives regarding this subject from the EU Parliament. And before you ask, please know that in every country there were elections to chose the ones who get a seat in the EU Parliament, so also in GB It basically is like every other descision made by government. Only Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungaria and Romania voted against it. Which is quite ironical in my opinion.

As I surmised.  The Brexit vote was a repudiation of their elitist EU reps.

Edit:  it is almost exactly what's happening in the US.  Sure, we elected our leaders but on both sides of the aisle, those leaders have become elites, the ruling class.  They no longer vote for the people but for those they are beholden.  That vote to which you refer, was probably the last straw for those Brits who didn't agree with it, a majority.

Edited June 28, 2016 by Gunther

[Silent]

4 minutes ago, Gunther said:

As I surmised.  The Brexit vote was a repudiation of their elitist EU reps.

On which they voted themselves in elections. Seriously, do you know anything about the EU political structure?

[newtogolf]

2 minutes ago, Silent said:

On which they voted themselves in elections. Seriously, do you know anything about the EU political structure?

We vote for people all the time here in the US that claim to be something they aren't.   Obama ran on a platform of transparency and he's one of the least transparent we've had.  Voters get fooled into electing people they think will represent their views but in the end they don't, GW Bush is a prime example.  

Surely the US isn't the only country where politicians run on platforms that will get them elected but never intend to fulfill the promises made during their campaign.  

[Silent]

5 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

We vote for people all the time here in the US that claim to be something they aren't.   Obama ran on a platform of transparency and he's one of the least transparent we've had.  Voters get fooled into electing people they think will represent their views but in the end they don't, GW Bush is a prime example.  

Surely the US isn't the only country where politicians run on platforms that will get them elected but never intend to fulfill the promises made during their campaign.  

True, I'm not happy with every descion here as well. But that's not the point. Some people try to draw the picture that a big evil government somewhere far away is ramming laws trough your troat and there's nothing you can do about it. That's simply not true, GB had a lot of influence with a lot of representatives voted by the British people. If people think now that they don't have to deal with refugees anymore it's a gros misrepresenting of facts; the people they voted for decided in best interest about the dealing of the refugees. Without being in the EU, that problem doesn't go away; so still people they voted for will decided to let a certain amount of people in. And this time they can't ask Belgium, Austria, Netherlands etc. for help if the numbers are going to be too high.

[Gunther]

9 minutes ago, Silent said:

On which they voted themselves in elections. Seriously, do you know anything about the EU political structure?

Yes, see my edit and @newtogolf's response.  

[newtogolf]

4 minutes ago, Silent said:

True, I'm not happy with every descion here as well. But that's not the point. Some people try to draw the picture that a big evil government somewhere far away is ramming laws trough your troat and there's nothing you can do about it. That's simply not true, GB had a lot of influence with a lot of representatives voted by the British people. If people think now that they don't have to deal with refugees anymore it's a gros misrepresenting of facts; the people they voted for decided in best interest about the dealing of the refugees. Without being in the EU, that problem doesn't go away; so still people they voted for will decided to let a certain amount of people in. And this time they can't ask Belgium, Austria, Netherlands etc. for help if the numbers are going to be too high.

People here voted for Obama, but that doesn't mean everyone that voted for Obama wants Syrian refugees to flood into the country.  The next step might be to put pressure on UK leaders to stop allowing refugees into the country.  

My understanding is that Sweden has denied 80,000 refugees entry into the country and is taking heat from the EU for doing so because it places greater pressure on other countries to take them.