My plan to heal this BROKEN, BREXITED BRITAIN [The following memo was found in a pilates studio in Shoreditch earlier this month, and forwarded to us anonymously. It is sourced to "BV Strategic Relations”, a highly secretive firm apparently registered in Panama, which describes itself as a "bespoke crisis management consultancy to governments”. The authenticity of the memo …
The second referendum will be run under the following rules:
1) The ballot will offer two choices: "Remain" and "Sorry I voted leave last time, but I now wish to remain.".
2) In the unlikely event of a write-in campaign to subvert the democratic process, a result of "Leave" will only be valid if it obtains a Mugabe majority (a minimum of 120% of the vote).
3) Polls will be held every Thursday until the right result is obtained.
That would be the Scotland one, then.
Tick, tock...
The First Referendum was on 5 June 1975. Reverse the result of that and we've been out of the Common Market European Economic Community European Union for 41 years.
Hell, it's better written and more thought out than...
a) the PM's contingency plans (remember he did call a referendum and as it had two options, the leave one was a possibility)
b) any of the leave campaigns' plans (one web page instead of a 600-page document as the SNP came up with)
While HM's Loyal Opposition slowly disappears up its own fundament.
It's a modern-day emperor's new clothes with the entire British political class. Of course, it's unlikely that any of them will suffer for the damage they've done to the country.
Rant over, until the next one.
Of course, it's unlikely that any of them will suffer for the damage they've done to the country.
This is why I want Boris Johnson to be elected as Tory leader. I want the bastard in office, not slithering off to private life while still raking in five grand a week for one column in the Torygraph. I want him to have to face the shitstorm he's done so much to create, to demonstrate once and for all to everyone that he is utterly incapable of running the country, of keeping us afloat when he plunges us into a new depression before we've even clawed our way out of the last one.
When people lose their jobs, I want them to see him at the helm. When pensions have to be re-evaluated and contributions go up, I want people to know he's to blame. When essential services are cut, I want people to hear his bumbling excuses. When he admits that migration levels will barely change, I want the vile xenophobes and racists who are currently insulting people in the streets to know how they've been manipulated -- I want them to stop hassling people who aren't to blame and start flinging dog shit at Boris's front door in Islington. And I want Boris's failure in office to go down in history as his toxic legacy, so he will only ever be remembered as the incompetent idiot who put his own ambition above the good of the country.
Boris won't care. He seems to be NPD ambitious and it would be enough for him to get his name immortalised on the historical list of UK England and Wales Prime Ministers.
He doesn't actually believe in leaving the EU, he has just taken this opportunity to have a shot at number 10. He doesn't care what damage he does and who gets hurt, as long as he gets there. He is not the harmless clown he portrays. Thwart him.
Oh, it's far worse than that. No. 10 is nothing more than a step on the career ladder to these people these days, the ultimate aim being a cushty $$$$$-paying non-exec seat on several multinational boards, a speaking gig or two at a fancy uni, some well paid but meaningless UN synecure position and all the world travel, big dinners and pimms you could want, all aboard your private yatch.
Detest Thatcher as you should, there was always a sense she genuinely believed what she was doing was for the good of the country. The Camerons, Goves, Johnsons et al don't even seem to pretend any more. Sheer naked mercenaries.
> This is why I want Boris Johnson to be elected as Tory leader
At the risk on invoking Godwin's Law, I wonder if many Germans were thinking the same when they elected Hitler?
> he will only ever be remembered as the incompetent idiot who put his own ambition above the good of the country.
Or for something much, much worse.
We really should try and elect honest, competent, morally and ethically principled political leaders, shouldn't we? Not simply hand power to self-serving morons in the hope that they might embarrass themselves.
At the risk on invoking Godwin's Law, I wonder if many Germans were thinking the same when they elected Hitler?
In all fairness, Hitler hadn't created the mess Germany was in. He temporarily got the Germans out of it, but then got them into the biggest mess of the century. Their mistake was handing him more power than even traditional Prussian absolutism allowed a Chancellor.
"Their mistake was handing him more power than even traditional Prussian absolutism allowed a Chancellor."
Not exactly. Hitler stole that power. His party didn't win a majority, but used thugs and mercenaries to prevent the opposition from turning up to the Reichstag to vote against his "Enabling Act" (the first step toward martial law).
Proof that you don't need popular support, or even a Parliamentary majority, to destroy a country. Just enough people who don't stand against you.
Because it's important to be fair to Hitler?
It's important to be fair to everyone. That includes ourselves, by examining our own attitudes and opinions in the light of the available evidence.
Admittedly, I'm still having trouble doing this with regards to Boris. Especially as he's just announced that he won't be running for the party leadership, after all he's done and said. The cynic in me sees this as a move to give the fractionally-less toxic Gove an easier run against May. Yesterday's magically convenient 'misdelivered' email from Sarah Vine to her nearest and dearest reads like a smokescreen -- it's Gove who will be handing Boris a cushy Cabinet role. I bet classically-minded Boris is already imagining how he will thrice refuse the proffering of a senior position before humbly accepting, like a modern-day Caesar.
"We really should try and elect honest, competent, morally and ethically principled political leaders, shouldn't we? Not simply hand power to self-serving morons in the hope that they might embarrass themselves." ???
No politician would ever get elected then especially since you included "Honest" in fact any one of the points you mentioned would exclude all Politicians !
Yeah I have great faith in our political system right after we have proportional representation voting system, but neither of the top two would ever want that - would they so no matter how much better it would be as it wouldn't be in their self-interest !
'"We really should try and elect honest, competent, morally and ethically principled political leaders, shouldn't we?"
And where in Toyland does one find such a creature?'
Corbyn and John Major both score 3 out of 4.The public doesn't vote for honest and ethical politicians. Well maybe the public do but the party MPs don't.
'We really should try and elect honest, competent, morally and ethically principled political leaders, shouldn't we? Not simply hand power to self-serving morons in the hope that they might embarrass themselves.'
Care to name one or two, any party will do !!!???
The current 'Free for all', that the 2 main parties are engaging in, shows up all politicians as being somewhat suspect, as far as I can see.
At this point some dingbat Political group will hoover up the disaffected and surprise everyone.
Has anyone looked it up lately ? The referendum was consultative (is that even a word ?) only. UK parliament will decide. Quite possibly after general elections which may well be decided on this issue.
So nothing has happened yet, and probably nothing will ever happen. Or have we now come to a point where we are sure something will happen because a politician says so ?
Didn't think so.
Well, I suppose a pertinent prior example might be Western Australia which, as far as I am aware, is still part of the Australian Federation.
However, the truly manipulative part of the referendum process was that it has always been about offering the British people something they can't have as a proxy for a different battle. The Tories Brexiteers simply want the ability to run a more right wing government while retaining the free market and freee movement of wage slaves - they have no intention of a "hard" exit. UKIP are simply the modern equivalent of Luddites: they may represent the disadvantaged and discontented but those people are not going to he helped by pretendiing it's possible to wind back time and bringing out Vera Lynn.
We're not going to leave in the way that voters wanted because we can't - or at least not with any semblance of a functioning country left. They might as well have voted against gravity. The amount of unpicking of years of EU legislation would take decades. At best, we'lll end up in something like the EEA as some token sop to delivering the "verdict of the British people" - that is we'll end up largely as we are now with less say in the running of the club and a seriously disgruntled and restive population. At worst - who knows?
The problem with Parliamentary Sovereignty is that (a) it got us into this position and (b) parliament is descending into a paralysis of chaos.
Couldnt agree more. 12 months from now, this "World Changing" crisis will be forgotten about. Anyone remember The Greek Crises that was going to end the world within hours? Ultimately there is too much vested interest on both sides of the channel for a hard exit to happen. People will get round a table in Brussels and an Agreement will happen. Same old story.
No, it wasn't politicians that said we would leave the EU. It was the people, and we spoke clearly.
Woe betide any prime minister that ignores the spoken will of the people. Even though I don't have the faintest idea how, I for one am prepared to take up arms against any government that abandons democracy in my country. I hope everyone else here would do the same, after all our current prime minister supports the people rebelling against dictatorial government (Libya, Syria).
And no, I couldn't care less if the spooks see this.
Don't worry, I'm sure the spooks won't be worried about you quite just yet. After all, you haven't risen up against the lack of democracy in the selection of members of the Upper House nor against the democratic deficit in our choice of Head of State, so you probably won't rise up if one referendum is ignored.
Democracy means different things to different people. You might think that the recent referendum is binding in law, but it isn't (contrast that with the Scottish one). Your opinions don't make it so (and indeed neither do mine, although I don't think it should be ignored either). Sadly we've seen evidence that some ignorant and resentful people thought the referendum result meant that anyone not born in Britain (not to mention quite a few who were) would soon be kicked out of the country. Do you think their idea of what the referendum was about or what it enabled is correct?
Well Rich 11, that's because the House of Lords and the Queen don't actually have any real power, one is an advisory chamber and the other is a ceremonial role which, while having in theory significant power, in practicality she has very little.
I have no idea why you mentioned kicking people out of Britain, oh wait, yes you are trying to tar Brexiters with the brush of heresy. Whoops did I say heresy? I meant racism of course.
Of course, given that I am engaged to a leave-voting immigrant then I wouldn't be too keen on seeing her thrown out, and I would be quite surprised if she were, considering that I actually listened to the Leave people's argument which said, on many occasions, that people who came here legally and haven't broken the law are more than welcome to stay.
Now, to respond in kind, what are your opinions on the remain supporters who want old white people to die because they voted to leave?
*Sigh*
I'll admit, I haven't seen the remain supporters doing that - but I have seen mention of "coffin dodgers" and talk of baby boomers screwing up their future. It's more of a disgruntled response and not directed at any one individual - but it's not particularly pleasant.
On the other hand, they haven't been shouting and laughing at people in the street or their place of work (I saw reports of a Polish waitress having a couple do this in a restaurant) and telling them "We voted leave - when are you going to?" - and this is regardless of where they're gone and what legal status they have here.
As a Brexit voter it seems that the country is in shit either way,
1.) if they don't do the will of the people by an EU exit then their will be riots/civil war here in UK, there are not enough police or army to control the people who will mass revolt against parliment because this was a free referendum to vote on !
2.) If they do an EU exit it will again be shit bit UK will recover depending on how the EU and whatever Government is in power handles the EU Divorce. It could be an amicable divorce or it could be a revenge divorce !
3.) We could have another referendum but before this a new law is enacted to fine anyone not voting, of lets say £1,000 to get as close to 100% of the population involved !
4.) If option 3 happens then if Brexit loses next time then we could make it the best out of three !!
So right now number 2 looks better option from a purely logical point of view, whether the remain camp like it or not if only because either ignoring said referendum or having either another referendum would make UK look like the laughing stock of the world which really would put us back in the dark ages and it would just look like the Politicians didn't get the result they wanted so will fiddle the next one to get it !!!!
"1.) if they don't do the will of the people by an EU exit then their will be riots/civil war here in UK, there are not enough police or army to control the people who will mass revolt against parliment because this was a free referendum to vote on !"
I don't think there's a big risk of that.
Most Brexiters rely on zimmerframes, mobility scooters and such to get around.
Or they have beer bellies the size of oil barrels slowing them down.
"It was the people, and we spoke clearly."
Nowhere near clearly enough.
A constitutional change should, in my view, require a referendum (in fact there should have been one before we joined the Common Market and there should have been referenda in all the countries to validate each of the treaty changes since then). But the referendum should require a substantial majority in order to change the status quo. A change should reflect a consensus.
Accepting the smallest majority means that major, long term decisions are made at the whim of a small group of swing voters who might not vote the same way next year, or even next week when they realise the consequences of their vote. That's just plain daft.
The UK has doesn't have democracy, it has _representative_ democracy. You vote for a local MP, who represents their constituency in Parliament. While they're not on committees or ministerial appointments of course - then they're supposed to be looking out for the greater good for the whole nation. And of course once in Government they may find that it's not that easy to give the people what they want. But they've been elected to do a job that I would not want to do, so I accept that.*
So your MP may legitimately act against your wishes, and your only legitimate recourse is to vote for the other bunch of liars next time. It's not great, but it's better than most of the alternatives.
*(With the exception of every Home Secretary ever, once the Security Services have brainwashed them into increasing Security Services powers!)
@TheTick - "No, it wasn't politicians that said we would leave the EU. It was the people, and we spoke clearly."
No we the people didn't. It wasn't *the people*, it was the *electorate* and not even half of that - 17m is a lot smaller than 64.1m (the rough population of the UK). The electorate is roughly 46.5m and well over half didn't insist on change, so parliament hasn't had a clear mandate from "the people". Furthermore, many people within the electorate were excluded (EU citizens can vote in local but not national elections, so they get taxation without representation)
As others have said, sane countries make sure that mandates to change are based on very clear results (like 2/3s majority) - 52% of 72% of 73% of the population (back-of-fag-packet maths) is not a clear statement from the people.
I'll concede that against the rules of the referendum the desicion was to Leave the EU and that has to be honoured to keep any shred of credibility for democracy. But what does "Leave the EU" actually mean? Are you sure that everyone who voted Leave had the same idea of what they were voting for? All that has happened is a desicion to commence a vague re-negotiation of our EU membership. We could have our position chnage from 'member' to 'associate' with no material change in
Consider that no one actually stated which bits of the EU we would leave and which we would keep, no promises were made, not apparently even on the side of buses. There is and never was any plan that was endorsed by the vote. Many want out of the single market but that's not what Boris is saying it means. There are likely many different views of Leave voters of what they wanted when they said leave. Some wanted out of the ECHR, which isn't even part of the EU; some want to divert the gross payment from the EU to the NHS, which isn't going to happen because it was never true. Some expect us to become another Norway, but to other Leave voters that will be betrayal.
I can't believe I'm agreeing with Jeremy *unt, but that is how fucked up things are. The right and democratic thing to do is now undertake Article 50 negotiations and then have another referendum on whether to enact the deal struck with the member states. I suspect many Leave voters won't like any deal because it wont go anywhere near far enough for what they thought 'Leave' meant, while others will be worried it gets rid of things they thought wouldn't be touched. This referendum result shouldn't be seen as a mandate for Boris to just negotiate any deal he wants and then enact it without a specific endorsement for that deal from the public.
"No, it wasn't politicians that said we would leave the EU. It was the people, and we spoke clearly."
Did we now? That's 26 votes leave for every 24 votes stay. Let me just show you what that looks like:
LEAVE STAY LEAVE LEAVE STAY STAY LEAVE LEAVE LEAVE STAY STAY LEAVE STAY LEAVE LEAVE STAY STAY LEAVE STAY LEAVE LEAVE STAY LEAVE LEAVE LEAVE STAY STAY STAY LEAVE LEAVE STAY STAY LEAVE STAY STAY STAY STAY LEAVE LEAVE LEAVE STAY STAY LEAVE LEAVE STAY LEAVE LEAVE STAY LEAVE.
(Actually, that's 23 votes stay for 26 votes leave, just to prove a point at how difficult it is to get a clear sense of which is which.) It's not clear, it's marginal. Held the week before or the week after, the result would be different, either much more for leave or a remain win. This is no way to decide a fundamental part of the UK's governance.
@DavCrav: Except it wasn't 26 to 24 was it? As a ratio yes, but as an absolute there were over a million extra votes to Leave. Don't like it? I don't care. It is the result that happened so get over it. If you want a clear majority vote in order to Leave then we should have also had a clear majority vote to take us deeper into the quagmire that the EU has become, only Labour didn't let that happen did they? The Treaty of Lisbon had already been overwhelmingly rejected by the Dutch (61+%), less so by the French (54+%), the UK didn't get its vote and we somehow all ended up as signatories. There are numerous others that have been signed that should perhaps also have required a majority vote. So quit complaining about the one that went the other way.
"No, it wasn't politicians that said we would leave the EU. It was the people, and we spoke clearly."
Did you?
A. If the people, for well-argued reasons, think the UK should leave the EU (without knowing what the new situation will be) then they're entitled to vote for that.
B. If the people, for well-argued reasons, think the current government needs a good kicking then they're entitled to vote for that.
But if the people use A. to express B. then they abuse the democratic process. Like any other right, democracy/entitlement to vote comes with responsibilities.
"I for one am prepared to take up arms against any government that abandons democracy in my country."
Which form of democracy? At the moment the UK has a system of parliamentary democracy, where a referendum is normally only consultative. And should democracy be based on first past the post or proportional representation? Role of the House of Lords? Questions, questions ....
"No, it wasn't politicians that said we would leave the EU. It was the people, and we spoke clearly"
I think you'll find nothing clear was said at all. A tiny majority in favour of leaving, most of whom were lied to wholesale or had no idea what they were voting on. Referenda are advisory at best. Many countries have several until they get the result the govt wanted in the first place.
@ Mooseman
"I think you'll find nothing clear was said at all. A tiny majority in favour of leaving, most of whom were lied to wholesale or had no idea what they were voting on. Referenda are advisory at best."
None of the remain people knew what they were voting for. They thought it was the EU as it is or to stop WW3. The result was clear. The rules were set out, the question asked and the result in without any doubt. And while referenda are advisory, that is not what was sold to the public by the PM himself who apparently can start article 50 without parliament. And the more twisting and corruption occurs the more hated the EU will be (including our participation of).
It's funny though - the EU is held up as corrupt and undemocractic, yet our own government behaves as badly or worse and we're assured this is a better thing. Presuambly because it's not foreign.
Plenty of people knew what they were voting for - stability, human rights, opposition to delights such as TTiP, green issues, economics. And then there was the leave campaign which sadly focussed on immigration, taking our country back (presumably to the 19th century) and spending non-existent money on the NHS. It may turn out to be true that we do eventually do better out of the EU, but I cant understand the mentality of someone that says to themselves "we're in an ok system, if we leave who knows, it might be better in 10 years". It's like Russian roulette.
Err... have you checked the international news in the past few days? Checked the Pound? The stock exchanges?
Would you try to tell your wife "I asked my closest friends if I should divorce you, they said yes, I shall respect the will of my friends. But don't worry, it's not happening yet."? Se if SHE stays.
a good sum-up from a post in the Guardian:
"Dear Brits!
I am not sure that the Guardian reported about this, so I just want to let you know that in the meantime, the EU has already moved on without you (see below).
Finally we got rid of the whinging arrogant sabotaging EU member and we can focus on the much needed reforms which the UK has been serially blocking for years.
During these three days, the horrible evil ineffective bureaucratic blah blah blah EU of 27 members has
(1) nominated our main negotiator and the negotiating team,
(2) showed clear-headed calm leadership and unity,
(3) sent a reassuring message to the financial markets,
(4) prepared a draft for further steps which our EU-27 representatives will start discussing tomorrow.
What exactly have the leaders of the most democratic fantastically sovereign highly effective UK done? In relation to the Brexit crisis, exactly ZERO, except making the damage to the UK (= the British people) and the rest of the world even WORSE by dragging their feet.
By the way, this decisive EU move towards more integration (which the EU-27 people support according to the polls and which has been in the making for a long time) means that the UK is less likely to get any kind of even remotely favourable deal with the EU by the minute. The more integrated we get, the more you are out.
I should also mention that with the Leave vote, you have automatically annulled the agreement struck during Cameron's blackmailing 're-negotiations'. Namely, the agreement that Cameron signed in your name contains an annulment clause in case of a Leave vote, and a further statement that there will be no renegotiations.
So the restrictions on EU immigrants claiming UK benefits, the exemption of the UK from the "ever closer union" etc. are GONE. And the EU has already moved towards further integration, as I explained above. Yes, the 'unreformable' EU is already on the way to reforms.
So the kind of EU that you voted about on Thursday, with yet more special treatment for the UK and further integration on halt, no longer exits. I think it is only fair you know this.
The world has moved on. It is time for you to do so too and trigger Article 50.
Well, the great exodus of capital and jobs from the UK will start tomorrow, because your Great Leaders are making sure to make the markets extremely nervous in relation to the UK's future outlook. Day four of the brave new UK will be a nightmare for the Brits. The clock is ticking against the UK whether you invoke Article 50 or not.
Note that none of this is the EU's fault = the fault of 440 million people in 27 other EU members. YOU are the ones who caused this.
The EU summit on Tuesday will be quite interesting, when Cameron as your representative meets the leaders of the other 27 EU members whom the Brits have just stabbed in the back, in spite of all our good will and patience. Will Cameron have the guts to trigger Article 50?
While the UK is consumed by petty infighting and lacks any kind of leadership, the rest of the world is moving on.
Have a nice isolated life.
Bye bye."
Sad but largely true, probably won't be as bad as all that but it never had to happen. I do hope that Cameron gets his just desserts in history even though he will not suffer financially.
Rather, he will take a directorship (it always Barclays isn't it?) and go on speaking tours where people will pay him for his wisdom.
That beggars belief somewhat but there you go.
Unfortunately, this piece is, as one might expect from its source, quite wrong in various degrees...
"which the EU-27 people support according to the polls and which has been in the making for a long time"
According to the polls, this is fabulously untrue. Indeed, the reason why the EU is trying to rush the process is not because of trying to get it done and save uncertainty, but because a lot of EU nations want to hold referendums as well and there's a very large chunk of anti-EU feeling in certain nations right now, even France. The longer this goes on, the more unstable the EU becomes and more likely others will vote out or will return very worrying numbers of people who want out. The EU politicos know this.
"(2) showed clear-headed calm leadership and unity,"
You mean apart from Junckers going off on one (he has calmed down now), the Polish EU commissioner (who clearly has no clue of history) etc.etc. The most sensible sounding ones are Merkel (she knows she's hanging on by a thread) and the French PM (who has twigged what the problem is).
"What exactly have the leaders of the most democratic fantastically sovereign highly effective UK done? In relation to the Brexit crisis, exactly ZERO, except making the damage to the UK (= the British people) and the rest of the world even WORSE by dragging their feet."
That's exactly the point. Action is not always the best course. In this case, inaction is. The more we let the EU population mull this over, the more the EU politicians sweat as they know a large amount of their population are not happy with the EU either. Inaction in this case, is the best action.
The piece is fantastically biased, factually inaccurate and clearly from a rabid remainer. By the way, before anyone comments on my stance. I made my decision for reasons not mentioned by either campaign and ignored them both, as they were equally appalling. Trying to implement single rules across such diverse cultures as present in the EU will always fail. People simply won't tolerate it. So, the EU will fall at some point, it's just a question of when. The EU has a stated policy of more and more centralised integration and single rules for all (taking out all differences across the EU) and history has time and again shown this simply won't work over the size of the EU and even much smaller areas. Extremely tight, inflexible integration (as proposed by the EU) has always ended badly.......it just takes time.
Of course it's rubbish, it's in the Guardian. One of the two most bottom-feeding gutter-rags in the UK (world) along with its polar opposite the Daily Mail.
It just sounds like someone bitter foaming at the mouth.
Personally I am remain, but whilst I know this exit thing is going to hurt me financially, I will adjust and adapt as necessary. I'm already prepared.
But I do feel sorry for people with big tracker mortgages and heavy debt, because they have much less room to manoeuvre and they are going to be rogered.
"But I do feel sorry for people with big tracker mortgages and heavy debt, because they have much less room to manoeuvre and they are going to be rogered." You might feel sorry for them but it was the people who mostly could not afford a mortgage because of the lack of financial resource to be able to afford one who will not feel sorry for them as they are not even on the bottom rung of the housing ladder.
I agree with you saying that all newspapers are gutter trash not even fit for being used for fish 'n' chips as they all have their own particular bias and I know of no actual real News Paper anymore !
I also find it quite funny the amount of votes that the Gov Petitions site has accumulated but anyone here knows that with one's own domain name one can create millions of false votes as they don't require any true identification to authenticate with to prove UK voter's identity, just a simple script and having a domain name, it might become apparent of the vote goes past 100m - rofl
Junker and Merkel are playing the bad/good cop, don't worry. Merkel will accurately calculate how to suit best German interests - not UK ones - and then will act.
Hollande has so many personal troubles at home, it will try to use this to reinforce his fully tarnished image. It will try to increase France weight, but others are already stepping in (Italy, for example). And he has Le Pen to care of, so he will had a touch of French nationalism as well, and that won't bode well for UK.
All of them are looking at how much they could exploit this situation without crippling their business towards UK too much. Still, everybody wants to gain from the situation.
Meanwhile, if UK doesn't send the formal request, it just tells other "exiters" that yes, EU is bad, but we are too worried about exiting truly - before we want to be reassured our wasn't a true mistake. Just, the more it waits, the more it tells it fears to actually exit. Meanwhile until it doesn't, it is fully obliged to comply with the actual EU rules, and if it whines, guess what the answer will be?
Of course people like Farage are not ready yet to renounce to the monthly 7,000 euro plus other benefits the EU gives them. Spitting in the plate is OK, just leave the plate on my table, please.
Well said. Perusing the european press sites shows a union falling apart, hence the noises of a Germany - France super state. Pushing ahead for closer intergration right now, will just force the hands of the countries that are dealing with unrest over an out vote.
Personally I'm not that bothered about the negotiations with the EU as it won't be around much longer. We should start talking to South Korea and it's car makers, that would certainly get VW leaning on the German govt to allow a deal through.
Petty, it's not true. Being a citizen of the closest ally to UK in EU, Sweden, who joined EU with a 51-49 vote, and as UK, not part of the Euro-zone, we're a bit worried of the sentiment against UK right now. To be honest, we would have agreed with Brexit if it was for the right reasons and not xenophobic, "they will steal our jobs" BS. There were plenty of reasons for leaving EU, you just picked the wrong one and by that reason you are now perceived lower than Greece. There are a few, mostly very vocal right wing groups, that shout about referendums, but in the greater populous they just want this to finish fast (and in many cases not very nice for UK). As a Swedish citizen I now worry that the union will move faster in the wrong direction when UK is not helping us block the most insane suggestions. Even so, most leaders and people in EU wants this over with, so we can go on with our lives, and if they can punish UK (and scare some other member from leaving), that's a bonus.
@nugge
"Even so, most leaders and people in EU wants this over with, so we can go on with our lives, and if they can punish UK (and scare some other member from leaving), that's a bonus."
Ah, the Juncker method. Really good way of keeping things together........scare members from leaving!! As a way of maintaining unity, holding a gun to peoples heads is a pretty poor way. Again, look through history and see who's managed to hold a country together for any length of time using that method. Insanity.
The reason people voted to leave wasn't xenophobia. Not saying there weren't some, but it wasn't that for most. The press and a load of politicians are portraying it as such, but it's much more a rebellion against politicians in general.
@anonymous boring coward
"Sadly, you are completely wrong about this. Completely."
Well, unless you believe somewhere close to half the population are racists (in which case immigrants would be hanging in the streets), you've been reading and sucking up the rubbish put out by politicians, the BBC and some newspapers. I know a lot of leavers and none of them did it for immigration and none of them are racists.
I know very few who admit to voting leave. The only one I do know of - my mother - did it exactly because she doesn't like the "groups of foreigners" who are on the street when she goes shopping. Apparently, the groups of Pakistani and Bangladeshi people immediately before this, or the groups of English people before that, were no problem ... At no point have the finer points of democracy been mentioned - just the foreigners (I also suspect she hopes that my Czech wife will be escorted to the nearest airport).
This just goes to show that your simple "I know a lot of leavers and ... none of them are racists" is, just the same as mine, an anecdote with no value.
Yep, we did the same with the Euro election in Sweden, but this is about perception and the perception among the vast majority of EU is that UK is a xenophobic country that thinks it is more elevated economically/politically/culturally than the other EU countries. The British media has made this picture even more prevalent in Europe. Sad, but true.
"The reason people voted to leave wasn't xenophobia. Not saying there weren't some, but it wasn't that for most. The press and a load of politicians are portraying it as such, but it's much more a rebellion against politicians in general."
I agree whole heartedly with this statement as that is why I voted leave and the other reason was that Politicians always blame EU for everything, so now the ball good or bad will be completely in their court so to speak - after 1 year of exiting EU - I will give then 1 years grace ( I mean their continued excuses will only be valid upto 1 year after exiting the EU) after that OFF with their HEADS !
I do find it odd that many people who voted to leave characterise the EU's attempts to facilitate exactly what they wanted as "holding a gun to people's heads".
As an outsider (NZ if anyone cares) , I think the analogy of a failed marriage is apt - albeit a very polygamous relationship with 28 people. Britain is Miss Piggy, a high-maintenance partner who was once the belle of the ball, but is now "of a certain age". She's been a demanding partner, and because squeaky wheels generally get the oil, she's got a lot of concessions.
But now she's chucked a tantrum and decided to leave. Her froggy partners have sighed, and said "OK, if that's what you really want, lets do it" because there is no point in prolonging the pain of a break up. To which Britain gets even more upset and screams "What a terrible thing to say - how dare you try and force me to... do the... very thing I said I wanted?".
Yup, Britain is the Miss Piggy of the world. Good luck with your future relationships, but please don't come calling on your former Commonwealth boyfriends - we've moved on.
"But now she's chucked a tantrum and decided to leave."
It's more like Miss Piggy asked her sowfriends what she should do, and half said leave, and the other half said stay. (One half dead, half eaten sow also said leave.)
Miss Piggy didn't tell her frog lovers either way, but they overheard the consultation, and because they are now pissed off little froggies they told her to first declare that the leave-friends won the argument (albeit only by a few bacon rashers), and immediately pick up her purse and many lipsticks and get the hell out of the pigsty.
Some might say that it's better to not do things in haste and anger.
"a rebellion against politicians in general"
Of course - the EU was portrayed by Boris et al as an undemocratic monolith. How dare a bunch of MEPs (that we elect, if we can be bothered to turn up to vote) have the power to approve or disapprove policy proposed by the EU commissioners? Totally unlike our own system where the cabinet is selected (not elected) by the PM, and an unelected second house.
A rebellion against politicians that's left us with a PM elected by 0.2 % of the electorate and in the hands of the TTiP supporting nutjobs called the conservative party. Thanks a lot.
It might go the other way ... everybody suddenly sees the benefits of being part of the EU now that GB shows what it means to quit. German news definitely don't show increased euro-scepticism, but finally start to explain what the EU actually does and how GB will be affected by leaving.
I expect everybody to sit back and watch the British experiment.
"Trying to implement single rules across such diverse cultures as present in the EU will always fail."
Such diverse cultures?
Come on!
I bet you that cultural differences are minimal, and mostly superficial between most EU countries!
Yes, the Brits are much better at queueing and saying please and thank you than most other nationalities, but that's about it (and this politeness seems to evaporate once a car door is shut). Well, maybe less prone to make "towel reservations". But then again, there is Magalluf.
The similarities between cosmopolitans throughout Europe are much greater than the similarities between the rural population and the city dwellers within the UK.
@AC.
"Such diverse cultures?
Come on!"
Don't know how much you've travelled, but yes, the cultures are very different. Especially when you also count eastern europe and the Med. Just look at financial culture. Northern Europe is strict, with (relatively) good financial management and people pay their taxes. The Med (lets say Greece) only pay taxes when it suits, splash money around like water (especially when its low interest loans due to joining the Euro....after their entry was fixed), build up huge debts and then cry about it when it all comes home. Then, they expect everyone else to bail them out, or they'll crash the Euro!!
Cultures in all sorts of ways are vastly different. Name a coountry of anywhere the same size as the EU that has implemented centralised, single rule government and survived? Don't talk about the USA, as their structure is much more flexible with each state having considerable power of its own. They are nowhere near the same as the EU.
Call me crazy, but I don't think USA has less integration between states than the EU has between sovereign nations... So, yes, I'd like to mention the USA as an example with big cultural differences, but tight economical integration.
It is true that levels of corruption and attitude towards the state, as well as the state's ability and inclination to collect taxes, varies a lot. But we still have individual states. If they fail in their commitments, they are either excluded from the EU or have to make amends.
So why pretend that the EU is bad on a fictive premiss that we are integrated into one nation?
@AC.
The EU has openly stated its aims. It wants a single set of rules (laws) across all member states and all areas of legislation. It's been slowly and methodically hitting more and more areas every year since it began. Not saying having central rules is a problem, but all....no. The latest openly stated areas are welfare and tax. So, the EU is (in the long run) after central control of everything. They don't try to hide it.
The USA is very different. Yes, there is a load of central rules (laws), but each state has considerable individual flexibility and uses it very openly. They can pass their own laws (and some are very different from state to state) and raise taxes etc.etc. Even individual cities have their own taxes and laws. This is a totally different model to the EU model, which is central control, no variance.
So, the EU is more of a Soviet EU in model than a USA.
"The EU has openly stated its aims. It wants a single set of rules (laws) across all member states and all areas of legislation"
Harmonisation is not the same thing as control.
There will be resistance where necessary on certain things, which will never be completely harmonised, simply due to local differences such as climate or demographics.
And every nation can always use its sovereignty to pull out of the EU. A super state would be 100 years in the future, and won't happen unless it is a natural painless step. So it may never happen.
Not to mention that Europeans have been fighting each other for a very long time.
The Greeks went rampaging around the world. The Italians brought them down and occupied much of Europe up to the edge of Scotland. The Germans attacked them and brought down their empire... and we haven't even got to 500 AD yet.
Europe isn't a country. The people who live there don't see it as a country. If cancelling an international trade treaty causes this much pain, we probably shouldn't have signed it.
Personally, I suspect there are major problems in the financial system. If GBP can drop 10% overnight then its grossly disconnected with economic reality. In that case, the pain was destined to arrive at some point and its probably better to get it now than let the problems pile up for later.
"Don't talk about the USA, as their structure is much more flexible with each state having considerable power of its own. They are nowhere near the same as the EU."
Not that familiar with the US system but I rather thought they had a President running the country, federal income tax, a national defence force, etc. Sounds rather more integrated than the EU.
a lot of EU nations want to hold referendums as well
You make a confusion between 'EU nations' and 'far right parties from EU nations' who are fast to exploit xenophobia to develop their nationalist, fascist vision of the World.
Germans strongly back EU membership, oppose referendum - poll
Poll: 64% to keep France in the European Union
That's exactly the point. Action is not always the best course. In this case, inaction is
Others may well act and move during this time, doing nothing will only lead to a spectacular loss of credibility for UK, or rather England+Wales, UK having just committed suicide.
>Germans strongly back EU membership, oppose referendum - poll
So you're saying the Germans are so strongly in favour of EU membership that they oppose being asked if they are in favour of the EU membership?
Perhaps their leaders have more sense than Cameron had, then to *actually* ask people what they wanted.
What does "diverse cultures" mean here?
The EU is about tedious agreement on things like how wide a push fit domestic water pipe fitting should be, or harmonizing employment rights across countries.
Diverse cultures, just sounds wrong here, perhaps you could expand on the idea.
Different economical models, sure. but culture, nah not buying it.
A bit obnoxiously formulated, but not far off.
I will add to that.
With UK no longer in position to press anything.
1. TTIP is dead and no amount of effort will make it rise and shuffle about. The Germans and French will kill it.
2. The Eu-wide opposition to genetically modified crops, hormone-buggering pesticides, etc has just solidified into rock solid. There will be no-one to sabotage that regulatory process either.
3. The level of sabotage on green energy initiatives, city and water pollution regulations has just dropped significantly too.
And so on. While the initial reaction to Leave amidst Europeans was positive towards the UK staying this is very quickly becoming Good Bye and Good Riddance and it will only continue in that direction. Just to be clear - this is not based on reading the Graunidad. I am following the opinions of the media in a couple of European countries and they are going exactly in this direction. I would expect them to start agitating openly for "Goodbye and Good Riddance" by Thursday at this rate.
Up yours. By the way, you are welcome to your "closer integration" which translated equals additional imposition of stupid and counterproductive rules imposed by a tiny "elite" living in a bubble generously paid for by your taxes.
Welcome also to all the economic refugees coming your way and the social and economic chaos thus engendered, we're not taking any of them.
Welcome to to your fascist overlords, good luck on getting any say whatsoever in who they are and what they do. The reforms will be what they decide is "good" you, I do hope you agree with their choices because, bad luck being you if you don't.
Oh, and we agree about the petty infighting amongst our politicians; shrug; it's what stupid politicians (but I repeat myself) do. Give yourselves a few more weeks and you'll be doing the same.
Welcome too, to trying to keep the lid on more nations starting the same process to identify and isolate the fascists in Brussels, you might need to ask Merkel to resurrect her experiences with the Stasi, you're going to need them.
All the said restrictions will not only continue to apply, we will also cut all payments to the EU effective immediately, good luck on filling that $200 million a week hole in your already overstretched budget, we can use the cash as we like.
Welcome too to trade restrictions if you go down that street; it's a two way thoroughfare and you have more to lose than us, ask your average German car manufacturer for a start. Cut off your own nose to spite your face (you're pretty good at that so it shouldn't be hard to do) if you wish, we expect nothing less than peevish stupidity after all. Free trade actually benefits all, but we do expect you to be too closed minded and actually too stupid to recognize that.
"Welcome to to your fascist overlords, good luck on getting any say whatsoever in who they are and what they do"
You mean the tory government? Yeah I'd agree. Funnily enough most of the counterproductive and stupid rules that affect our country are purely British in origin. Even funnier, we are now likely to be in the same position as Switzerland - bound by EU regulations (if we want to benefit from the EU trade) and still paying in to it, but unable to have any say in how it's run.
"Let's see how the EU goes long term shall we? Not looking too financially stable at present. Germany bankrolls it. Italy needs to bail out the banks again. All looking shaky now another net contributor disappears."
I think things are much more dynamic than this.
With the U.K. now being unattractive, there will be many opportunities for economic expansion in continental Europe -especially in anything EU driven, such as scientific research. Nordic countries, for example, will be banging on the funding door, as will any other nations with historically strong scientific research.
This would lead to EU gaining in popularity.
EU citizens (note to Brexiters: that's just a convenient term for citizens of countries in the EU, ok?) will see the debacle and economic downturn in the UK, and decide that the EU is definitely a good thing.
The resulting economic upturn in the EU will cover any losses from the UK net input. I am not sure how big the net contribution actually was, but given all that's come back in many forms, I would be surprised if it was anywhere near as much as the Brexiters have claimed.
If the powers that be can make us without damaging their own interests, yes.
Pour encourager, les autres
HOWEVER if - and is a big IF - I read this aright THEN TPTB are not a monolithic tinfoil hat illuminati conspiracy.
Just a loose alliance of various factions that have done well out of a powerful EU and centralised unaccountable power in general.
Banks
Large corporates
City financial institutions
The International Left
The Ecological lobbies.
Existing Politicians
The Meeja, especially that which gets huge dollops of cash from governments
The Academic community
The Public sector
Now, the first three finance everything by and large. And its not in their interests to see markets collapsing wild currency fluctuations and banks put at risk.
And that I trow, is why Gideon and Mark have been quiet, and have meekly indicated their determination to Do The Stability thing.
The rest are more, or less dependent on that gravy train. And they have failed to deliver a meek compliant population to the the first three.
They are desperately trying to fix that, because they know that if they fail that is the end of their usefulness to the top 3.
And their jobs.
The ones near the bottom will survive stripped down, so they may be the first to break ranks.
But the ones in the middle have nothing to lose and everything to gain by all out massive no holds barred propaganda warfare.
They have shown themselves to be very scared and unbelievably vicious.
1. Leave vote was older voters in England... i.e. Conservative heartland voters. Take out Scotland and N. Ireland and it was a deeper shade of tory blue!
2. Boris will do a better job than any of the "stay" vote saboteurs would negotiate.
3. Blah blah too many words, that won't fit in Twitter.
4. "Pandora's box is open!" That'll never get past a corporate anti-smut filter.
5. Theresa May is Stasi toast. She was chosen because her political career is expendable and of no consequence. Tommy Mair has less taint as leader than her right now.
IMHO:
1. Boris will *not* be leader, pro-EU Cons will attack him for not siding with them.
2. Leader will be a less important on-the-fence person, not Stasi May, not Johnson. Keywords to look for: "unity.... continuity....stability...." in reality: "non-entity....inability.....incredulity....inept"
3. Split party, weak, negotiates from position of scheming divisiveness. Next election kicked out by big margin. Unelectable for a decade. Farage will hammer and hammer and hammer every half assed negotiating position they try to take.
4. Britain exit looks a lot like when it was in, gets a free trade deal (EU needs stability too), is out of the social side, the free movement side, and the EU military force (yes they have an army, go Google it). Most of the regs look the same because there's no reason to change them. Surprisingly easy to end the EU links since it doesn't require a change of direction, only a decoupling of the engine to permit a *future* change of direction.
5. Labour Leader "Grayey Mc Grey Face" (I forget his name), who was bumped into the pro-EU camp, gets ejected by the very same people who bumped him into that losing camp.
But then I was wrong about the outcome of Brexit....I thought it was an easy win after all the scaremongering. Now they've voted, I'm 100% behind the exit, because to be half assed about a negotiation is to undermine the negotiators.
"Leave vote was older voters in England... i.e. Conservative heartland voters. Take out Scotland and N. Ireland and it was a deeper shade of tory blue!"
Apart from all the staunch Labour heartlands that led the charge out. Saying it was Conservative voters is fantastically wrong. It was older voters (who bothered to vote, unlike a lot of the youth), but from all parties. That's one of the reasons Corbyn is in such trouble.
You're right about the negotiations. Time to play hardball and stand as one. But, at the moment, that means don't invoke Article 50 for at least 6 months if not 12 months. If we play it, we loose it, but not playing it makes the EU politicians sweat. Don't forget on Friday morning, Germany picked up the bill for the whole EU. German voters weren't exactly happy about bailing out Greece, but now they've got to bail out the whole EU!! The Med isn't happy about austerity. This is an EU wide problem, not just a UK one. The EU either has to radically change, or it will fall apart.
Sigh. I've just seen the age splits on the voting. The young overwhelmingly wanted remain, the leave vote cam from the old. Many of those that won't even live to see the article 50 completed have decided the future against the wishes of those who are going to have to live with it for decades.
@ werdsmith
"Sigh. I've just seen the age splits on the voting. The young overwhelmingly wanted remain, the leave vote cam from the old"
If I read it right didnt a lot of young people not vote. Compared to the older ones who did. If those who have to live with the decision dont care either way then its not anyone elses fault. And complaining the young must live with it but the old dont, does that mean we are reducing the value of a person due to age and as a result the older people are less equal than others? And doesnt that rule out experience over naivety.
And doesn't that rule out experience over naivety.
There is no experience in the world that can tell you what will happen as a consequence of this decision. The genuine experts are holding their hands up and saying they don't know. The BS politicians are just lying to everyone. I supposed some of these old farts may know how to operate crystal balls, but experience is no use.
@werdsmith.
Very true. Both campaigns were awful and cited this and that fact when almost no facts existed. How can you determine what will happen when nobody knows what will change if you leave, and that's the point of leaving. So, all the projections etc. were worthless, as were the opinions of experts, as they didn't know what would change any more than anyone else. So, their expert opinion was based on nothing!! The remain camps economic projections to 2030 were just farcical. They can't project for 12 months let alone 14 years......
However, if the young didn't vote, they can't really complain. If they'd voted in the same proportion as older people, then it should have been an easy remain. But, they didn't, chose to not take place in the democratic process, so should stop complaining. Learn for next time.
In reality, there will still be foreign travel, people will still be able to go and live and work in other countries. You'll just need to get a visa.....maybe. Can you imagine what would happen to the Spanish economy if all the Brits living there came home? Life will continue and things will adjust. Yes, some changes will occur and they'll be some pain, both for them and us. Don't forget that although we export a lot to the EU, they export a hell of a lot more to us. So, it's not in anybodies best interests to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
> So, their expert opinion was based on nothing!! The remain camps economic projections to 2030 were just farcical. They can't project for 12 months let alone 14 years
Hang on. The remain projections were based on a known set of rules and relationships. There might be a few percentage points of divergence, but nothing to worry about.
On the other hand (as we've now seen) the Leave campaign had no set of rules in mind. Even now, they're still making stuff up. So none of their projections had any validity at all.
>And doesnt that rule out experience over naivety.
As a 65-year-old, I'm forced to admit that it was mostly Baby Boomer selfishness. No 'experience' involved.
As for 'apathetic' young people - it's always been like that. Young people don't understand how royally they're being screwed by their elders.
@"Saying it was Conservative voters is fantastically wrong...It was older voters"
Older voters vote conservative:
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/56280/1/democraticaudit.com-Age_significantly_impacts_on_the_choices_that_voters_make_at_elections.pdf
Scotland and Northern Ireland *dont* vote conservative, but *did* vote to stay.
@"But, at the moment, that means don't invoke Article 50 for at least 6 months... EU politicians sweat..."
Sounds like someone wants to delay the inevitable! But the UK Commissioner to the EU has already been replaced with the Latvian one, and treaties are already being drafted as though the UK is not in. Brexit vote cancels some deals, and all 6 months extra does is to hand another 5 billion to the EU.
@AC.
"Older voters vote conservative:"
Oh, please. Yes, in general, this is true. However, when traditional Labour areas vote leave, it can't be just the Conservative voters, or even mostly the conservative voters. Labour MPs know full well that large numbers of their voters voted out and this has been highlighted many times in reports from these places. The truth is that this is not a party issue, except UKIP I suppose. Liberal (any left?), Labour and Conservative all voted leave in large numbers. You can't possibly get so many areas, including the whole of the Midlands, vote out without Labour voters.
"Sounds like someone wants to delay the inevitable! But the UK Commissioner to the EU has already been replaced with the Latvian one, and treaties are already being drafted as though the UK is not in. Brexit vote cancels some deals, and all 6 months extra does is to hand another 5 billion to the EU."
And the EU wonder why people want to leave? We haven't left yet, we haven't even invoked article 50 yet. In fact, we've only had a consultative referendum. We don't have to do any thing and yet the EU politicians have already started writing us off. Talk about jumping the gun!! Farage stood up and made a speech in Brussels today and accused them of being deluded and was spot on. I don't agree with a lot of what he says, but Brussels politicians are even more remote from the voters than Westminster politicians and he was spot on. They have no idea of the real world and are covering their eyes and ears and refusing to see the obvious. The EU either has to radically reform or it will crumble. It's just a matter of time. Personally, I'd like to see the radical reform and then stay in (an option we were refused), but they are too blinded by their grasping, power hungry ways to see the obvious. They are absolutely deluded.
Much as I hate the idea, this is only going to increase the rise of the right and anti-EU parties and politicians in Europe. The politicians will complain about it, but it will be all their fault for not listening to their electorates.
"Britain exit looks a lot like when it was in, gets a free trade deal (EU needs stability too), is out of the social side, the free movement side"
No. Not on the table. In order for it to get on the table, the EU would have to basically rewrite everything. So expect this not to happen unless it looks really, really bad for the EU. Which it won't, not bad enough for them to give up on a central plank of the idea of the single market to begin with.
"No. Not on the table right now. " TFTFY.
Wait until the Yanks get involved and see where negotiations go, because they will be getting involved like it or not. I doubt there'll be much punishment and more likely an agreement that the UK was always a "special case" as it was never really "in" what with all its concessions, hence no need to disincentivise other countries who have the issue of the common currency to get past and whom are a different kettle of fish entirely. When it comes down to it this will be a tripartite deal between UK, Germany, and the US.
... as otherwise it is very much 'la-la-la, I can't hear you'.
Rather - don't want to see the state of the global markets, the falling value of the Pound (and that is not the bottom), the amount of value wiped off pension funds, etc.
That of course is media lies!
Yes - it isn't 2 out of 3, unless of course you are Farage who thinks 52:48 deserves a re-run, but only if the result was 'In', not 'Out'.
Twice as much money was "wiped off pension funds" in September 2014 after Scotland voted to remain in the UK. (A month or two later it was wiped back on, as markets always do.)
Talk of money being "wiped off pension funds" is always nonsense anyway. If you are a private investor it only affects you if you were planning on cashing in your entire pension on June 24th, and if you hadn't de-risked your pension in the years leading up to your retirement date it's your own fault. If you are a big pension scheme then short-term fluctuations in the market will not affect the long-term viability of the fund, unless you're running it very badly.
You clearly didn't own property in the 1990s. Negative equity was the result of many people going bankrupt as houses they bought suddenly lost half their value almost overnight. Banks were foreclosing on loans as people lost jobs leaving them without a house and still owing hundreds of thousands of pounds due to the selling price of the house being so much lower than the mortgage price. It was the negative equity in the US housing market that was one of the driving forces behind the 2008 banking crash.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_equity
Well yes. Credit ref agencies have downgraded UK, so the mind-blowingly humungous national debt just became more expensive to service. So the oft-quoted 350 million a week to EU could start to seem like chicken-feed compared to debt interest.
Then the banks starting with BofE may feel the squeeze then consequently the mortage lenders. So up go interest rates. Those poor folk who have got tracker mortgages up to their hilt to buy a home, have maxed out credit cards to furnish and equip, new car on PCP, deposit paid on holiday and young children are the new repossession victims.
Don't you understand, Alien8n, that foreclosing on properties and imprisoning the masses with unplayable debt is the banking system working at its finest. They aint interested in freeing people to enjoy themselves and think about what they could be doing rather than what they be trapped into doing to try and survive.
Jeez, how much longer is it going to take for a critical mass to realise the deception and global banking con?
And now it is full swing, isn't it, ...... Sucker in new punters with a teaser introductory mortgage rate on vastly overpriced properties and then hit them in a relatively short space of time with an arbitrarily chosen increased rate which sucks the life out of their existence. What other assets do you know which rises in price as it gets older and more decrepit and in constant need of repair and replacement over time. It just aint normal, is it? Half a million quid for a two up two down terraced house in London is a sick joke, which has no one laughing other than the fool.
Reduction in demand for housing, reduction of value of Sterling and overall reduction in price of housing was the exact reason I voted Leave. I do not own anything yet, and feel fine about the risk of screwing everyone that does - the only people who will have serious problems will the curse that is BTL landlords.
"Reduction in demand for housing, reduction of value of Sterling and overall reduction in price of housing was the exact reason I voted Leave"
Following that logic, why don't you just buy a dirt cheap house right now in some low demand area?
You do realise that any savings on the purchase price will be eaten by an increase in mortgage costs? The REASON house prices would go down would be the higher interest rates.
It's pretty good for those having a few hundred thousand laying around though, as they can buy property to let, with good return, and excellent prospect for future price raises.
I'm not the OP but...
"Get yourself a second supplier and a proper negotiator" For some suppliers that may be possible, but often this is not possible. A second supplier in many areas just doesn't exist. If you are starting from a clean slate then there may be possibilities but once you have settled on a supplier they might have to threaten to eat your first born before the cost and upheaval becomes worth ripping out a system that is well integrated into your business with years of customisations and data and going to an alternate.
As for " a proper negotiator". Yeah right, maybe if you are a large enough governrmental department, a FTSE 100 etc you may be able to negotiate certain terms. However if you are a medium to large enterprise who is buying from a massive software house then you haven't got much of a hope. Similarly if you have a parts supplier with no fixed purchase agreement.
If you are an SME or on the small end of a large organisation and you have pricing agreements with Oracle. Microsoft or Adobe that stops them putting up the price of goods where no prior purchase contract exists or you are supplied fuel from xyz and they have agreed a fix fuel costs for the next x years then I would be very sceptical.
A supplier sells something, you agree to buy it. If his costs go up because he is dealing in US$ then you can expect them to go up or you get exchange fluctuation insurance or hedge your currency. Either way on average you will lose out.
"If you are an SME or on the small end of a large organisation and you have pricing agreements with Oracle. Microsoft or Adobe that stops them putting up the price of goods where no prior purchase contract exists or you are supplied fuel from xyz and they have agreed a fix fuel costs for the next x years then I would be very sceptical."
Or just buy in advance. You know, like a fixed price 3 year Office365 contract or when buying your software via volume licensing (of any size business) then pay extra for software assurance. Current Sterling wobble has zero impact on me adding another 200 users or whatever to our licensing - not at least until renewal time but even then I can back off / forward by a month or two to take advantage of what the markets are doing then.
@ac
"If your supplier can simply increase his prices to you, then you're his bitch and that's not our fault. Get yourself a second supplier and a proper negotiator to play them off against each other for price."
Thank you for your sharp observation, will you be on our negotiating side? We need really clever people like you.
Hi, Steve “Battling Digital Europe” Bong,
Yes we all realise that abject objectionable politics is a daily sub prime scripted SOAP, hosted and presented by dodgy media operations and British Brainwashing Corporations, but things are way beyond there being any chance of, by any imaginable Xmas, all will be forgotten and the Peasant’s Revolt will be over.
IT is only just getting started flexing its virtual muscles and sharing its right novel left of erotic exotic centre intellectual property.
Can’t, …. well, ….. don’t wish to bother disagreeing that certain dark Pandora Boxian forces are unleashed and at their engaging work, rest and play, but quite whether any bespoke crisis management consultancy to governments are truly equipped to deal with future changing event cycles, is one of the games being played out in a media programmed project near everyone nowadays.
Thanks for all the phish and intel.
None of this is new and news though, for apparently it is practically at least half a millennium old …… Yes Minister
Said Manfred Weber, the chairman of the European People's Party.
And that's what is wrong with the EU. It's not some social experiment that you can play with. Muppets like this guy think they can just push their idealistic goal of european unity like some tin god playing with people like rats in a lab.
There is absolutely no reason why we cannot work together to achieve social and economic parity, but it doesn't have to forced down our throats. Perhaps one day Eurpe will be ready for unity, but it isn't something that can happen overnight and can only happen because people want it - not because some muppet who wants to make a name for themselves thinks its a good idea.
Before anyone starts yelling "Leaver!!", I voted Remain, as despite muppets like this and the obvious fact that the EU as an organisation is failing, I believe we are better off in Europe. We just need to fix what's broken and stop pushing the ideal of a European Super State.
Whether it's 27 or 28 makes almost no difference to the influence of the UK. The EU is now dominated by two voting blocs - the Eurozone and Schengen (actually, to within rounding error they're there danger bloc). Schengen is simply a recognition of reality for most nations with land borders, but makes little sense for the UK. The Eurozone was always a bonkers idea, short of full political union. The UK is most unlikely to join either bloc n the foreseeable future.
So on any decision relating to matters financial or movement of peoples the UK will always be outvoted unless we use our veto, which makes us very unpopular. That's why a Brexit was inevitable at some point.
>The Eurozone was always a bonkers idea
We should remember that it looked pretty groovy, before 2008. Stable, sound, affording low interest rates (when ours were much higher).
It was the Great Recession which torpedoed the Euro - which hadn't had to deal with catastrophe before. We were dumb to make long-term decisions, in these straightened times. We should have remembered how bad many of the post-Depression 'solutions' were.
And I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Euro were still operating, when all this fuss has died down - in the same way that the dollar survived the Great Depression.
So glad someone else realises that the 'Change from within' pitch was a lie.
The UK can/could never change anything from within if it was always in the minority.
The veto was envied by other members and would have come under some form of legal challenge eventually.
It is better we suffer the pain of Brexit now, rather than when the EU breaks under the strain and multiple countries are floundering in the aftermath.
Remain was a risk and so was Leave, either one would have cost us something.
Personally, I went with leave.
All the Threats and all the promises on both sides were less than the truth.
If you believed any of them you were simply mugged.
Sorry, no. A single currency can only work with a single government. If it hadn't have been for 2008, the euro would have fallen at the next shock (and there's always a next shock).
I'm sure it was very nice for (e.g.) the Greeks to have much easier borrowing terms when they joined, but it really hasn't worked well for them. Ditto Spain, Portugal, Italy, France ...
PS apologies for predictive failure - for "they're there danger bloc" read "they're the same bloc".
and therefore a racist zenophobic chav *(^*%^&$%*)*)*)&)(&) (or at least to one person kind enough to respond a post on faceborg)
The reason I voted leave is because the leaders of the EU are unaccountable to the people of the EU.
Remember Tony Benn's words "How did you get the power? and How can I get rid of you?"
We have enough trouble in this country getting rid of unelected arses as is, without adding 3 more layers of unelected arses above them.
And reading through some of the Guardian's comments, someone nailed it spot on.
What has happened is that the left have been cunningly dragged into an unholy alliance with big global businesses keen to exploit the working class, its happened because big businesses gave them such words as 'inclusiveness', 'diversity' to use on people opposed to mass immigration.
After all , if you are opposed to foriegners coming here you cant be very tolerant , therefore you are a racist to be shouted down, but the same mass migration has handily driven down wages for the citizens already here and led to businesses being able to rake in more profits.
Couple that with the lack of worker protections and the dream "The EU will save us from nasty businesses" when the EU is heavily lobbied by those self same businesses to not load any more worker protections into the system"
Its this disconnect between the ideal of a very smug self serving bunch in labour and the actual working class labour voter that the leave campaign exploited, but reading some comments from them about how "lazy brits claim benefits while hard working immigrants are a boon to the country" make me want to puke, because change the word 'brits' to the word 'jews' and you have the all the words from a previous generation's hatred of one group of people.. and we all saw how that panned out
Anyway, must go... I hear the local remainers have found my address and are coming with torches and pitchforks.....
> The reason I voted leave is because the leaders of the EU are unaccountable to the people of the EU.
*Sigh* Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union#Governance and you'll see that it's a perfectly democratic organisation. Probably more so than UK party politics.
> Remember Tony Benn's words "How did you get the power? and How can I get rid of you?"
I'm pretty sure he knew the answers, but Tony Benn wasn't above a bit of empty rhetoric when he wasn't getting his own way.
>you'll see that it's a perfectly democratic organisation.
The democratic structures are not in doubt, but there are two problems:
1. the real power doesn't reside with the parliament, it resides with the council of ministers who can make decisions and then claim it was someone-else's fault.
2. Democracy isn't an end in itself. Its a means to the end of self-determination. When you scale a democracy up, you start squashing the individuality of those below as they all conform to one law. You reduce the power of any given vote and any given voting block, which leads to those at the top being insulated the effects of a small revolt, giving them time to quash it before it grows. You can have perfectly democratic structures but make the voting base so large that no-one can influence the executive. What's the point in a democracy if it doesn't reflect the wishes of the people?
In this case, the people have said they wish to leave. Its downright frightening that Bong can write such a cynical piece and we all recognise his ideas as those playing out.
>The democratic structures are not in doubt, but there are two problems:
There's really only one problem - the incessant lies of the anti-EU press. They have continually insisted that there were no democratic structures.
Yes, the Council of Ministers hold considerable power. But they're elected.
>Democracy isn't an end in itself. Its a means to the end of self-determination.
Basically, you're saying that democracy is only worth it if it gets the result you want - rather strange under the circumstances.
>as they all conform to one law
You do realise that the scope of EU regulation is very narrow - almost entirely about terms of business, terms which two trading companies/countries would have to negotiate anyway. If you think that leaving the EU is going to see a bonfire of laws, think again.
"You do realise that the scope of EU regulation is very narrow - almost entirely about terms of business, terms which two trading companies/countries would have to negotiate anyway. If you think that leaving the EU is going to see a bonfire of laws, think again."
"Newspapers" like the Sun have played people for many years. I don't think many Brits know how EU actually works. EU has just become a proxy for anything that we'd like to complain about, and a general hate-object. It's become a useful windmill for people like Boris to fight in order to appear brave and resourceful. (And where IS Boris?)
"but reading some comments from them about how "lazy brits claim benefits while hard working immigrants are a boon to the country" make me want to puke, because change the word 'brits' to the word 'jews' and you have the all the words from a previous generation's hatred of one group of people.. "
If the Brits were a vulnurable and powerless minority, I would agree. But they aren't, so I don't.
Thank you for your courteous and reasoned response - I admit that I don't follow EU political wrangling well enough to have spotted that. I might argue that your points apply to any unit bigger than a village, so I still think that democracy is the least-worst alternative ;-)
When Ghandi (hardly the saint he was painted) was asked what did he think of Westen Civilisation he is reputed to have said that it would probably be a good idea. From the non-binding referendum too close result and all the crap that has been said about it it I think I can see what he meant.
I'll get my coat it's the one with the UK's unwritten constitution in the pocket
I guess there are some in the UK who would prefer relinquishing control of governance to faceless, unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. Self governance is over-rated, right? Who really needs control over one's self destiny? The majority of Englishmen and Englishwomen are basically peasants who "need" elites to control their lives.
You prefer the 'elites' who grew up at Eton etc. then? Our home-grown 'elites' are way more divorced from the majority of Englishmen and women than the european variety, and we have our own unelected bureaucrats who seem to have more say in the decisions of the UK than those of europe.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
