Brexit - The UK leaves the EU

[Touring Mars]

Yeh, it's pretty weird - there is still a majority of MPs who favour staying in the EU, more Labour than Tory, but the divide in the Commons is not really down party lines. The only school of thought that still has a majority of any description is 'We should respect the vote' - both Tories and Labour are too frightened by the prospect of losing a huge number of voters by trying to reverse the Brexit referendum result.

 

[mustafur]

Maybe another referendum is needed as the politicians are too useless to work out what to do next.

Give 3 options.

Hard Brexit
Soft Brexit
Remain.

For all we know if there was these 3 options remain probably would of won anyway.

 

[baldgye]

Maybe another referendum is needed as the politicians are too useless to work out what to do next.

Give 3 options.

Hard Brexit
Soft Brexit
Remain.

For all we know if there was these 3 options remain probably would of won anyway.

Well, yeah remain would have won if the Leave vote was split...

 

[Touring Mars]

Maybe another referendum is needed as the politicians are too useless to work out what to do next.

Give 3 options.

Hard Brexit
Soft Brexit
Remain.

For all we know if there was these 3 options remain probably would of won anyway.

Aside from the obvious problem pointed out by @baldgye already, there's the small issue of determining what 'Soft' and 'Hard' Brexit actually mean - there are potentially any number of definitions of 'Soft Brexit' for example, and the most obvious one (that seems to be most popular even with Leave voters) is the infamous 'cake-and-eat-it' model - i.e. ditch all the bits of EU membership we don't like and keep all the bits we do, which the EU itself has categorically ruled out from before the referendum was even held, so there was (and still is) not much point in putting that option to a public vote in the UK!

Similarly, it isn't even clear what 'Hard Brexit' is - it seems to range from everything from a new customs union to no deal whatsoever, so again it wouldn't make the process any clearer.

On the flip side, the 'Remain' options could have been split into at least two camps as well - 'Remain and push for ever closer union', 'Remain and reform' (a popular one!) or 'Remain but strip back the EU to a simple trading bloc'.

As such, a simple 'Remain' or 'Leave' was the only sensible option for a referendum question, and the result should be used to figure out (via Parliament) what the options are from that fixed starting point.

 

[baldgye]

Aside from the obvious problem pointed out by @baldgye already, there's the small issue of determining what 'Soft' and 'Hard' Brexit actually mean - there are potentially any number of definitions of 'Soft Brexit' for example, and the most obvious one (that seems to be most popular even with Leave voters) is the infamous 'cake-and-eat-it' model - i.e. ditch all the bits of EU membership we don't like and keep all the bits we do, which the EU itself has categorically ruled out from before the referendum was even held, so there was (and still is) not much point in putting that option to a public vote in the UK!

Similarly, it isn't even clear what 'Hard Brexit' is - it seems to range from everything from a new customs union to no deal whatsoever, so again it wouldn't make the process any clearer.

On the flip side, the 'Remain' options could have been split into at least two camps as well - 'Remain and push for ever closer union', 'Remain and reform' (a popular one!) or 'Remain but strip back the EU to a simple trading bloc'.

As such, a simple 'Remain' or 'Leave' was the only sensible option for a referendum question, and the result should be used to figure out (via Parliament) what the options are from that fixed starting point.

Also of course, that the terms 'Hard' and 'Soft' Brexit only came about after the result of the vote and while MP's where trying to figure out how we could theoretically leave the EU.
As Leave hadn't actually planned or thought anything through on how we would actually leave... only that leaving would of course, be better than staying...
Indeed even the leaders of Leave have changed there stances on what and how we should leave, with Nigel Farage, the 'leader' of the Leave campaign changing his stance radically between being strongly against the 'Norwegian model' before the vote and now being in favour of such a model.

One thing that is worth remembering is that the referendum wasn't actually about the EU, it was actually about political posturing and power-grabbing. Both sides thought that via a referendum they could increase there power within the country. David Cameron thought he could use it to strengthen his position as PM and silence the EU sceptics in his own back-benches, Boris Johnson thought he could use it to catapult himself into leadership contention and Farage thought he could leverage it into having more power in Parliament (to name only but the man characters of his horrible and sad story).

 

[Dotini]

Also of course, that the terms 'Hard' and 'Soft' Brexit only came about after the result of the vote and while MP's where trying to figure out how we could theoretically leave the EU.
As Leave hadn't actually planned or thought anything through on how we would actually leave... only that leaving would of course, be better than staying...
Indeed even the leaders of Leave have changed there stances on what and how we should leave, with Nigel Farage, the 'leader' of the Leave campaign changing his stance radically between being strongly against the 'Norwegian model' before the vote and now being in favour of such a model.

One thing that is worth remembering is that the referendum wasn't actually about the EU, it was actually about political posturing and power-grabbing. Both sides thought that via a referendum they could increase there power within the country. David Cameron thought he could use it to strengthen his position as PM and silence the EU sceptics in his own back-benches, Boris Johnson thought he could use it to catapult himself into leadership contention and Farage thought he could leverage it into having more power in Parliament (to name only but the man characters of his horrible and sad story).

Are there real and serious adverse consequences that could ensue due to your dithering and dilatory approach to Brexit? Really, what are they? Are they potentially existential, or less than that? On the other hand, if you change your collective mind and decide it's necessary to remain, could that even take place at all, and with minimal adverse consequences? This certainly seems like an embarrassing situation, but is it true history in the making, or more like fake news?

 

[baldgye]

Are there real and serious adverse consequences that could ensue due to your dithering and dilatory approach to Brexit? Really, what are they? Are they potentially existential, or less than that? On the other hand, if you change your collective mind and decide it's necessary to remain, could that even take place at all, and with minimal adverse consequences? This certainly seems like an embarrassing situation, but is it true history in the making, or more like fake news?

I don’t really understand what your asking...

As has been stated, leaving the EU raises serious problems. As it stands leaving at the moment would either force the U.K. to adopt the same trade laws as the EU, thus being in a similar position to how it is now, but with zero say in how the EU is run or those trade laws are set etc... or we go to war with Ireland. Neither are acceptable thus leaving the EU is basically at a stalemate. And that is just the problems now, let alone being outside of the worlds biggest economy with ZERO trade agreements with any country on the planet.

Remaining in my opinion is the only viable solution.

Damage has already been done, the pounds value has been smashed and U.K. households are on avaerage £900 worse off a year since the result came in.
Hate crime has increased, the NHS has seen a monumental drop in nurses applying for positions, meaning there is a labour shortage.... the list of damage done to the U.K. since the vote is fairly long and well reported on

 

[Scaff]

Are there real and serious adverse consequences that could ensue due to your dithering and dilatory approach to Brexit? Really, what are they?

Worse case scenario is a hard exit, with no deal with the EU and as a result no trade deal in place with the EU or any country outside of the EU and a move to WTO tariff rates. The potential impact would be billions per week in terms of a hit to the UK economy and massive delays at every port and border crossing.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...economy-cost-400-billion-pounds-a7994731.html

Add in the immediate end of all collaboration with joint EU bodies such as Europol, etc and its a very real and costly impact.

Are they potentially existential, or less than that? On the other hand, if you change your collective mind and decide it's necessary to remain, could that even take place at all, and with minimal adverse consequences? This certainly seems like an embarrassing situation, but is it true history in the making, or more like fake news?

It could take place and do so without any real impact bar the obvious political one and the money wasted getting to this point.

 

[Dotini]

Remaining in my opinion is the only viable solution.

Damage has already been done, the pounds value has been smashed and U.K. households are on avaerage £900 worse off a year since the result came in.
Hate crime has increased, the NHS has seen a monumental drop in nurses applying for positions, meaning there is a labour shortage.... the list of damage done to the U.K. since the vote is fairly long and well reported on

Viable means you get to stay alive. If Brexit is unviable, then to down that path means death. But if your best and brightest don't realize this or just can't cope, what should you do about it?

 

[baldgye]

Viable means you get to stay alive. If Brexit is unviable, then to down that path means death. But if your best and brightest don't realize this or just can't cope, what should you do about it?

Brexit isn't going to kill me and my family, but it looks like it will make us drastically worse off. It is also untenable in its current state.
The problem is that the vast majority of people who voted to leave, did so on the back of lies and prejudice, as an American I'm sure you can appreciate that changing the minds of those people isn't a simple matter.
The best and brightest thought and campaigned against Brexit and those more intelligent members who campaigned for it are slowly moving out of the public eye and out of the country.

Politicians are fundamentally lost. For the most part those who voted to leave did so for personal gain with the rest of the lower house split between Remainers and Euro-sceptics, however the vast majority of the constituencies they represent voted to leave. So they are unsure of how to position themselves, with little help coming from either of the leading parties leaders.
Which is why little to nothing has changed since the invoking of article 50.


What can be done about it to remain? Well the only thing that can be done is campaigning (for a second vote), confronting the lies of the Leave campaign and educating people on facts. It's why I won't simply stop replying to people on this subject and am more than happy to talk about and debate it with anyone and everyone.

 

[Dotini]

Brexit isn't going to kill me and my family, but it looks like it will make us drastically worse off. It is also untenable in its current state.
The problem is that the vast majority of people who voted to leave, did so on the back of lies and prejudice, as an American I'm sure you can appreciate that changing the minds of those people isn't a simple matter.
The best and brightest thought and campaigned against Brexit and those more intelligent members who campaigned for it are slowly moving out of the public eye and out of the country.

Politicians are fundamentally lost. For the most part those who voted to leave did so for personal gain with the rest of the lower house split between Remainers and Euro-sceptics, however the vast majority of the constituencies they represent voted to leave. So they are unsure of how to position themselves, with little help coming from either of the leading parties leaders.
Which is why little to nothing has changed since the invoking of article 50.


What can be done about it to remain? Well the only thing that can be done is campaigning (for a second vote), confronting the lies of the Leave campaign and educating people on facts. It's why I won't simply stop replying to people on this subject and am more than happy to talk about and debate it with anyone and everyone.

It looks like a hard exit is in the works, barring a miracle.

 

[baldgye]

It looks like a hard exit is in the works, barring a miracle.

So we go to war with Ireland again?
It really isn't simple. If hard Brexit was the only option, it would have happened by now, or at least we'd be negotiating deals etc...

 

[_ApexPredator]

What can be done about it to remain? Well the only thing that can be done is campaigning (for a second vote), confronting the lies of the Leave campaign and educating people on facts. It's why I won't simply stop replying to people on this subject and am more than happy to talk about and debate it with anyone and everyone.

Good on you. Not an easy task in the slightest.

 

[Mr Tree]

Brexit isn't going to kill me and my family, but it looks like it will make us drastically worse off. It is also untenable in its current state.
The problem is that the vast majority of people who voted to leave, did so on the back of lies and prejudice, as an American I'm sure you can appreciate that changing the minds of those people isn't a simple matter.
The best and brightest thought and campaigned against Brexit and those more intelligent members who campaigned for it are slowly moving out of the public eye and out of the country.

Politicians are fundamentally lost. For the most part those who voted to leave did so for personal gain with the rest of the lower house split between Remainers and Euro-sceptics, however the vast majority of the constituencies they represent voted to leave. So they are unsure of how to position themselves, with little help coming from either of the leading parties leaders.
Which is why little to nothing has changed since the invoking of article 50.


What can be done about it to remain? Well the only thing that can be done is campaigning (for a second vote), confronting the lies of the Leave campaign and educating people on facts. It's why I won't simply stop replying to people on this subject and am more than happy to talk about and debate it with anyone and everyone.

I saw a comic make a good point during his routine and he made some rather good points that point out it's not going to be as easy as teaching people on the facts. Lot's of people didn't vote on single policies but on general principles. That being more souvereignity versus stable financial markets. I know it's a comedic clip but it upholds some truth imo.

Spoiler: might contain profanity

I succeeded so proud of myself now B)

 

[baldgye]

I saw a comic make a good point during his routine and he made some rather good points that point out it's not going to be as easy as teaching people on the facts. Lot's of people didn't vote on single policies but on general principles. That being more souvereignity versus stable financial markets. I know it's a comedic clip but it upholds some truth imo.

Might contain profanity so let's try and put it in a.spoilerbox

[Spoiler title="Might contain profanity"]
Test
[/spoiler]

Yeah people voted to leave for many reasons, many of them lies, some not just a poor understanding of economics. Like it's a nice idea to want to have a stable independent economy.
But we physically boarder the worlds biggest economy and the Eurozone. Things that happen in Europe affect us regardless of us being in or outside of the EU. However, while inside London has been able to become the global fiance capital, which gives the UK incredible power and brings in money and has helped make the Pound one of the most valuable currencies on the planet, despite only being used on couple of small islands.

 

[Mr Tree]

Yeah people voted to leave for many reasons, many of them lies, some not just a poor understanding of economics. Like it's a nice idea to want to have a stable independent economy.
But we physically boarder the worlds biggest economy and the Eurozone. Things that happen in Europe affect us regardless of us being in or outside of the EU. However, while inside London has been able to become the global fiance capital, which gives the UK incredible power and brings in money and has helped make the Pound one of the most valuable currencies on the planet, despite only being used on couple of small islands.

True but all the lies they believed ,rooted back to more souvereignity. And wether we disproce those lies or not a leave vote still means more souvereignity on a lot of things. Until you can show a stable economy is more important for them you won't get their vote. They live within the pound so being in a good economy as a workingclass hero 'doesn't' help you it helps the banks and multinationals and having a bad pound has a lesser impact as long as you stay within areas you pay with pounds they will not be swayed into 'our' direction.

This is this principal thing. And we all have it. I'm a socialist that won't vote for the traditional socialist party as I'm principalled on them being socialist and not wolves een.sheeps clothes. No matter the program they suggest the scandals of the latest years means they have to earn my trust by laying of the wolves. They don't do that? Well **** yoyr policy I'm not voting for your party. It's somewhat the same with leave voters. The eu stepped on their toes for god knows what reasons and they won't just accept an apology.

 

[_ApexPredator]

Lot's of people didn't vote on single policies but on general principles. That being more souvereignity

No one can describe what they mean when they say "I voted for sovereignty".

Most people's interpretation of the term would be to have more of an influence on their own countrys future and be in control of the rules & regulations that it abides by.
Which is why it is useful to counter those vague ideas and general feelings with the cold stiff facts, particularly as reality is now really starting to bite.

For example, yes, we are free to trade with the rest of the world, we have been for decades, it isn't convenient to import Champagne and cheese from China, or to ship our fresh produce to Bahrain.
Our biggest markets are in the EU, however they aren't going to want to trade with us if suddenly that trade is hit with tariffs and ground to a halt by bureaucracy - things most people thought they were voting to reduce, but the reality is would have to increase were we to leave.

If we left but somehow negotiated an agreement whereby we could continue to trade as we were, we still wouldn't be at the table for any future negotiations and we would be far less in control and "Sovereign" than we were before the vote.

 

[baldgye]

True but all the lies they believed ,rooted back to more souvereignity. And wether we disproce those lies or not a leave vote still means more souvereignity on a lot of things. Until you can show a stable economy is more important for them you won't get their vote. They live within the pound so being in a good economy as a workingclass hero 'doesn't' help you it helps the banks and multinationals and having a bad pound has a lesser impact as long as you stay within areas you pay with pounds they will not be swayed into 'our' direction.

This is this principal thing. And we all have it. I'm a socialist that won't vote for the traditional socialist party as I'm principalled on them being socialist and not wolves een.sheeps clothes. No matter the program they suggest the scandals of the latest years means they have to earn my trust by laying of the wolves. They don't do that? Well **** yoyr policy I'm not voting for your party. It's somewhat the same with leave voters. The eu stepped on their toes for god knows what reasons and they won't just accept an apology.

I don't disagree, but the problem comes when people say that the UK can't make its own laws and has to follow the undemocratic EU laws. Which isn't true.

We are more than capable of being a sovereign nation within the EU and have been for the last 40 odd years since joining.

 

[Mr Tree]

No one can describe what they mean when they say "I voted for sovereignty".

Most people's interpretation of the term would be to have more of an influence on their own countrys future and be in control of the rules & regulations that it abides by.
Which is why it is useful to counter those vague ideas and general feelings with the cold stiff facts, particularly as reality is now really starting to bite.

For example, yes, we are free to trade with the rest of the world, we have been for decades, it isn't convenient to import Champagne and cheese from China, or to ship our fresh produce to Bahrain.
Our biggest markets are in the EU, however they aren't going to want to trade with us if suddenly that trade is hit with tariffs and ground to a halt by bureaucracy - things most people thought they were voting to reduce, but the reality is would have to increase were we to leave.

If we left but somehow negotiated an agreement whereby we could continue to trade as we were, we still wouldn't be at the table for any future negotiations and we would be far less in control and "Sovereign" than we were before the vote.

I agree with you but we're again looking from an economic perspective. Their issue is with the laws regarding food, taxes, motorcycle liscenses, imigration... that's what they care about.

So your (our) job is to explain you lose to much souvereignty when leaving the eu which sounds contradictory (while it's not).

 

[_ApexPredator]

I agree with you but we're again looking from an economic perspective. Their issue is with the laws regarding food, taxes, motorcycle liscenses, imigration... that's what they care about.

I'm sorry if I sound impatient with you, it's just this subject, it drives me round the bend.
I know all of this. I live here. I see these people every day. They can't tell you any of these laws that when we leave they won't have to follow but yet were pivotal to their decision making process when casting the vote.
And yep "well that's just an economic perspective" is exactly the sort of thing a leave voter may say in the face of the facts, or as they may say, whining, and then they just shut down, you're right.
However the reality is we all go to work and get paid so we can buy food and pay rent, and maybe go on holiday occasionally and if you're lucky indulge a hobby, etc, and to have these luxuries that many countries in the world don't have, you need to have a functioning economy.
The "economic perspective" is just reality. I'll let you work out what the other perspective must be.

So your (our) job is to explain you lose to much souvereignty when leaving the eu which sounds contradictory (while it's not).

It gets pretty exhausting when one side of the argument just isn't prepared to listen. They have their feelings remember. Facts, reason, evidence-based research & analysis don't work, and often it's their interests that we're all trying to argue for. Yet in the face of that you're insulted, the insinuation is you're weak-willed or weak-minded, you're pro government & stupid laws, etc, etc, etc when that couldn't be further from the truth.

You have to pick your battles, there's no shortage of idiots on the internet, remember.

 

[Mr Tree]

I'm sorry if I sound impatient with you, it's just this subject, it drives me round the bend.
I know all of this. I live here. I see these people every day. They can't tell you any of these laws that when we leave they won't have to follow but yet were pivotal to their decision making process when casting the vote.
And yep "well that's just an economic perspective" is exactly the sort of thing a leave voter may say in the face of the facts, or as they may say, whining, and then they just shut down, you're right.
However the reality is we all go to work and get paid so we can buy food and pay rent, and maybe go on holiday occasionally and if you're lucky indulge a hobby, etc, and to have these luxuries that many countries in the world don't have, you need to have a functioning economy.
The "economic perspective" is just reality. I'll let you work out what the other perspective must be.


It gets pretty exhausting when one side of the argument just isn't prepared to listen. They have their feelings remember. Facts, reason, evidence-based research & analysis don't work, and often it's their interests that we're all trying to argue for. Yet in the face of that you're insulted, the insinuation is you're weak-willed or weak-minded, you're pro government & stupid laws, etc, etc, etc when that couldn't be further from the truth.

You have to pick your battles, there's no shortage of idiots on the internet, remember.

Don't worry I get the impatience and frustration. I finding it hard to grasp too.
I'm almost all the way on your side and regarding flemish politics the same issue you describe is present.

I just no longer believe we can educate those people. My dad made this feelings remark as if it where fact and I pressed him on it when he refused to accept it may not be entirely true and based on emotions I got fed up and called him a dumb ****, needles to say I'm kot welcome anymore

But if even family rather believe their inner feelings then have a fact based discussion I don't think information is going to work.

We need to use the same tactics:
Play on emotion.
Continiously make assertions without backing them up (backing up emotions is losing winners play offense)
If you get blamed make a new assertion (again don't play defense)

Ok above paragraph aside (somewhat joking and somewhat critisism trump/leave/adf/... wat of debating) I really think we need to find an emotional opening to start the rethoric.

If you've fot leave family what's the last time a convinving argument made them think (not even change) their believes?

Studies hold no value as in their opinion numbers can be tampered with. Media holds no ground as depending on who controls the government it's either goverment or media conspiracy.

Truth is we lost the debate by playing by diffrent rules. We debate to get a better understanding of a subject. They debate to look like the victors wheter they won or not as long as they play offense and act as victors their base considers them victors. And they have the advantage of being able to oversimplify the complex workings of political and financial organs.


Edit: sorry for the long post

 

[Imari]

So we go to war with Ireland again?

I reckon you can take them. I've got twenty bucks on you.

 

[baldgye]

I reckon you can take them. I've got twenty bucks on you.

REBUILD.THE.EMPIRE

Full disclosure, I'm not advocating war with Ireland or the re-creation of the British Empire

 

[TenEightyOne]

Full disclosure, I'm not advocating war with Ireland or the re-creation of the British Empire

Last time the UK was in any state of war with Ireland it was partly down to the hard border. Just sayin'

 

[UKMikey]

REBUILD.THE.EMPIRE

Full disclosure, I'm not advocating war with Ireland or the re-creation of the British Empire

Oh god, does that mean we have to take Trump back? Couldn't we ship him to Merkel instead?

Full disclosure, I know...

 

[winet]

Russia and China don't have real votes either . Welcome to the club. Don't bother answering me because
“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

Bye Bye

 

[UKMikey]

Russia and China don't have real votes either . Welcome to the club.

On Brexit? I should bloody well hope not.

Don't bother answering me

That's hardly very democratic.

 

[baldgye]

On Brexit? I should bloody well hope not.

That's hardly very democratic.

Never argue with an idiot.

I jest... but I’m still a bit at a loss to what his post means




Airbus warn over leaving the U.K. on a ‘no-deal’ withdrawal

 

[Touring Mars]

Meanwhile, the British business secretary Greg Clark has said that free movement for UK workers inside the EU after Brexit is 'vital'...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/22/greg-clark-free-movement-uk-workers-eu-vital-brexit

Good luck negotiating that!

 

[baldgye]

Meanwhile, the British business secretary Greg Clark has said that free movement for UK workers inside the EU after Brexit is 'vital'...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/22/greg-clark-free-movement-uk-workers-eu-vital-brexit

Good luck negotiating that!

They can't be accused of shifting the goalposts.... if there aren't any goalposts!