The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - Off Topic

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By Gustoon
6/25/2016 1:52 pm
jsid wrote:
Man, I thought the US was in bad shape with Trump vs. Hillary. I checked the result when I woke up in the middle of the night and you're PM quit, Northern Ireland and Scotland are about to secede, and 5% of my life savings is gone.



We're on the verge of total fuckdom. Very disappointed at the result and now hoping for a 2nd referendum.
Sorry Martin, most people that voted Out have NO idea apart from immigration (and they even didn't realise that it won't happen overnight). The demographic cleary shows that it was the older generation that wanted out, and the youth, our future that wanted in, sad for them. Little Englanders win

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By martinwarnett
6/25/2016 5:02 pm
So you know what most people had as primary motivation? The media and Remain wanted it about immigration so they could use that buffoon Farage as a bogeyman; Farage is an MEP ( soon to be unemployed as a consequence ), isn't an elected MP and will have zero part in negotiations to leave.

The point can be turned about, it can be said that Remainers had little grasp of the issues pertaining to the increasing political and economic integration the EU wanted to push out there. When prominent Remainers admit we'd end up in the Euro... most Remain voters acted out of ignorance.

The demographics you'll have see will tell you how ages voted - 18-24, 75% wanted out. The figure you'll not have seen is that 33% of all eligible 18-24s voted. That's way below the percentages of other age ranges.

So the vaunted youths being ignored... didn't care enough as a group to actually vote. Some act butthurt and want another referendum... and another... until they get a result they want, proclaiming democracy at the time.

Amongst all the ageist ****, people fail to ask the question - why did people who voted IN back in 1975 vote LEAVE now? Has to be racism... couldn't possibly be that having seen the disparity between what was proposed in 75 and what the EU has become has turned people against the EU...

Polls have shown support across European nation for Brexit; nations themselves want to have referendums. Denmark, Holland, Belgium, France, Italy, Spain, Greece ( duh ) have all made rumblings about referendums. Where we've led I'd not be surprised if others didn't follow.

Little Englander? I'm Welsh ffs... only way you could insult me more would be to call me a Jests fan...

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By Gustoon
6/26/2016 11:05 am
This is about the scale of it. You can make of this what you will, but I think this is a very well and balanced opinion of what has just happened and what could/will happen.


If Boris Johnson and Michael Gove have looked downbeat over the past few days, that is because they realise that they have lost and they know that Brexit is not achievable...

Perhaps many Brexiters do not realise it yet, but they have actually lost, and it is all down to one man: David Cameron.

With one fell swoop at 9:15 am on Friday, Cameron effectively annulled the referendum result, and simultaneously destroyed the political careers of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and leading Brexiters who cost him so much anguish, not to mention his premiership.

How?

Throughout the campaign, Cameron had repeatedly said that a vote for leave would lead to triggering Article 50 straight away. Whether implicitly or explicitly, the image was clear: he would be giving that notice under Article 50 the morning after a vote to leave. Whether that was scaremongering or not is a bit moot now but, in the midst of the sentimental nautical references of his speech on Friday, he quietly abandoned that position and handed the responsibility over to his successor.

And as the day wore on, the enormity of that step started to sink in: the markets, Sterling, Scotland, the Irish border, the Gibraltar border, the frontier at Calais, the need to continue compliance with all EU regulations for a free market, re-issuing passports, Brits abroad, EU citizens in Britain, the mountain of legistlation to be torn up and rewritten ... the list grew and grew.

The referendum result is not binding. It is advisory. Parliament is not bound to commit itself in that same direction.

The Conservative party election that Cameron triggered will now have one question looming over it: will you, if elected as party leader, trigger the notice under Article 50?

Who will want to have the responsibility of all those ramifications and consequences on his/her head and shoulders?

Boris Johnson knew this on Friday, when he emerged subdued from his home and was even more subdued at the press conference. He has been out-maneouvered and check-mated.

If he runs for leadership of the party, and then fails to follow through on triggering Article 50, then he is finished. If he does not run and effectively abandons the field, then he is finished. If he runs, wins and pulls the UK out of the EU, then it will all be over - Scotland will break away, there will be upheaval in Ireland, a recession ... broken trade agreements. Then he is also finished. Boris Johnson knows all of this.

The Brexit leaders now have a result that they cannot use. For them, leadership of the Tory party has become a poisoned chalice.

When Boris Johnson said there was no need to trigger Article 50 straight away, what he really meant to say was "never". When Michael Gove went on and on about "informal negotiations" ... why? why not the formal ones straight away? ... he also meant not triggering the formal departure. They both know what a formal demarche would mean: an irreversible step that neither of them is prepared to take.

All that remains is for someone to have the guts to stand up and say that Brexit is unachievable in reality without an enormous amount of pain and destruction, that cannot be borne. And David Cameron has put the onus of making that statement on the heads of the people who led the Brexit campaign.

Ps- This letter is taken from The Guardian on Saturday the 25th June. I know I said I'd stop talking about the EU, but I've gained around 5000 new followers in the past few days which shows people are looking for commentary on this issue????
Sent from my iPhone

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By martinwarnett
6/26/2016 11:22 am
Guardian are pro-EU. Conveniently they had "EU" nationals as columnists who just so happened to claim, without supporting evidence, people had told them they would be "going home".

The fact is that's a fantasy of Remainers. It's however undermined by reality.

The best time for Cameron to go is around the time of the party conference. Makes it easier for new leader to unite the party ( or try to ).

Cameron issues Article 50 NOW, then he's involved in 3 months of exit negotiations. He then resigns. Negotations left in limbo for months as leadership contest kicks on.

Allowing new leader to issue the Article 50 means the new leader has their negotiating goals in place, their team in place.

Which makes more sense? The latter clearly. It also allows the Eu to wipe their overworking arses and try a deal. Due to the egos involved, that won't happen.

Meanwhile we've got rubbish about "2nd referendum" - ignoring the fact you can't change the rules of a referendum after it happened because you don't like the result. It's also been manipulated by 4chan for the lolz.

35k signatures from Vatican City. Population 800.
25k from North Korea, a place well renowned for internet usage by it's people...
Even penguins from Antarctica have signed.

The doom and gloom predicted hasn't happened, yet. Granted it's more a medium / long term game by the sky hasn't fallen in.

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By Gustoon
6/26/2016 11:31 am
martinwarnett wrote:
Guardian are pro-EU. Conveniently they had "EU" nationals as columnists who just so happened to claim, without supporting evidence, people had told them they would be "going home".

The fact is that's a fantasy of Remainers. It's however undermined by reality.

The best time for Cameron to go is around the time of the party conference. Makes it easier for new leader to unite the party ( or try to ).

Cameron issues Article 50 NOW, then he's involved in 3 months of exit negotiations. He then resigns. Negotations left in limbo for months as leadership contest kicks on.

Allowing new leader to issue the Article 50 means the new leader has their negotiating goals in place, their team in place.

Which makes more sense? The latter clearly. It also allows the Eu to wipe their overworking arses and try a deal. Due to the egos involved, that won't happen.

Meanwhile we've got rubbish about "2nd referendum" - ignoring the fact you can't change the rules of a referendum after it happened because you don't like the result. It's also been manipulated by 4chan for the lolz.

35k signatures from Vatican City. Population 800.
25k from North Korea, a place well renowned for internet usage by it's people...
Even penguins from Antarctica have signed.

The doom and gloom predicted hasn't happened, yet. Granted it's more a medium / long term game by the sky hasn't fallen in.


You and I are poles apart on this one.
One of the points of that article was that Cameron (love him or loathe him) has got yet another one over his old mate Boris, whoever takes over as PM is politically f'd, its now a poison chalice, and the likely candidates know this, Boris and Gove are both uncharacteristically quiet, coincidence? I think not.
I'm emotionally drained and quite sad about our exit, and depending on what Scotland do will maybe decide where I end up retiring too.

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By martinwarnett
6/26/2016 12:25 pm
That's wishful thinking on the writers part.

Cameron isn't going to potentially allow Labour to win future elections to stick one over Gove or BoJo.

Scotland are toast, Sturgeon is an idiot.

Vote was for UK as a whole to leave. Eu won't allow Scotland to remain because Scotland aren't in the EU - the UK is, of which Scotland is a part.

Scotland will need to apply to join the EU - that's not a given. Spain will block them - if Scotland are allowed in, the Catalan region will look to leave Spain too.

Assuming they are allowed in... they lose the pound. Will have to join the Euro - with no "credit history" for their "previous" economy ( having not had a distinct one ), they'll not get a good deal.

North Sea Oil? They don't own it 100%. Any breakup will leave a fair whack left within the remaining UK. The oil prices aren't great... Scotland would also lose the Barnett formula money. Money within UK distributed based upon a formula - a formula that greatly favours Scotland over England or Wales.

As Scotland would be in the EU, rest of UK outside, then borders would be introduced, Scots needing visas to enter England and vice versa. Tariffs would be applied - 90% of Scottish trade is with England.

Companies will remove their presence in Scotland as a consequence; phone sales / support have moved up to Scotland / returned from India in recent years. Those jobs will go.

So based upon "keeping same deals with EU (lol)" Scotland will lose a **** of a lot. Given their spending plans have massive holes in at present, they'll be bankrupt within two years and begging to leave the EU...

Retire to Wales instead. It's quite nice, if you like sheep.

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By Black Adder
6/27/2016 11:06 am
Completely agree with Martins post result first post.

I voted OUT.

As the rest of us Northerners did, all Cameron thinks about is London and the financial sector.
All through the debate all we heard was how bad it will be if we leave the EU,not how great it should and could be if we remained.......PROJECT FEAR.

We are the United Kingdom,5th biggest economy in the world,member of the G7, NATO and the Commonwealth.

Doesn`t anyone think Voltswaggon & BMW wont sell cars to the UK anymore? or France sell us Apples and Cheese?

So we dont have a special trade deal with the EU (27 countries),lets trade and set up deals with the other 150 + countries in the world including the US,Japan,China,Brazil,India,Canada etc etc.

UK is sick of people telling us what we should say and do (Mr Obama etc etc),and what light bulbs to use.

The quicker we`re out the better.

Just proves how out of touch ALL polititions are with how the general public feel,talk about stuck in the Wesminster bubble!

Hurrah for democracy at last.

ps forgot to mention we`ll save £350 Million a week and actually get to decide how we will spend it.
Last edited at 6/27/2016 11:12 am

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By Brrexkl
6/27/2016 3:59 pm
1. What is Article 50.

2. Why is it so scary?

3. Where is that "V" for Vendetta guy when you need him?

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By Brrexkl
6/27/2016 4:14 pm
Forgive me, I feel a slight need to apologize and explain.

Some might take my "V" joke offensively. Usually I simply wouldn't care. After all, it's a JOKE.

However, being American I know there is a lot of Anti-American views out there, and some might see this as another 'stupid, lazy American joking about things that should not be joked about' kind of thing.

What I mean by the joke is that obviously situations are to the point that Revolution is contemplated. Not all Revolution involves Wars between Governments, mind you. In fact, in the best ones... nary a shot is fired.

Which equates to the United States and our 2nd Amendment that so many Non-Americans seem so opposed to.

We have the 2nd so that all Americans can bear arms to form Militias to rise up against a Tyrannical US Government.

Yes, our Founding Fathers gave us an "In case of Emergency, break glass" statute in the very Constitution they created, in case what they created was one day bastardized into something Corrupt and Tyrannical (which some would argue has already happened).

Which means, for Americans, if we allow the 2nd (or any of the Constitution, really) to be taken away, we have no real recourse against a Tyrant Nation... and one thing all Tyrants have done in History is disarm the populace. Our Founding Fathers had the foresight to realize this, and what is meant to be our 'Bat Signal' to rise up is any case in which the US Government tries to take away our Right to Bear Arms.

They also didn't want Farmer John bringing a pitch fork and Citizen Black Crow bringing a bow, they wanted the Militias to be formed with people who had Arms of the proper 'period' or time. In other words, as our Military acquires greater technology, our 2nd gives us the right to 'arms race' with them in Personal Weapons. Which is why the "Do you need a Machine Gun to Deer Hunt" attack is so stupid... because the 2nd isn't about freaking Hunting, it's about forming Militias with privately owned Arms (which includes Armor, by the way) to rise up against a Corrupt Government.

Which brings us back to EU. Some feel they have a Tyrannical grasp, and Revolution is afoot (we do hope Peaceful Revolution, it's the best kind but not always possible). Hence my "V" joke.

Long explanation, sorry. Back on point. :D

Re: UK leave or remain in the EU ?

By Brrexkl
6/27/2016 4:20 pm
Forgive me, as I'm from the US so it's not really my situation...

but when people say things like "90% of Scotland's Trade is to X"... well, yeah... if it's REGULATED that way by a higher authority, then of course it is.

The question that SHOULD be asked is two-fold... (1) would Scotland CONTINUE to have Trade with X and (2) is Scotland capable of Trade with Y.

If Yes/Yes, then there is no harm in leaving as your Trade will continue. If Yes/No, then you are still Dependent upon X, so you expose yourself in the future if they decide to stop Trade, if No/Yes then Y Trade must be Equal or Greater than X Trade, and if No/No... well, screwed the pooch and stuck where you are.

Just because something is a certain way, doesn't mean that it is the ONLY way. Don't stop at 90% of Scotland Trade being with X... look at WHY it goes to X and if there are Y's and Z's out there that would off-set a possible X Loss.

Yep, I enjoy Economics to much.