TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile

View Poll Results: Should Britain leave the European Union?

Voters
59. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES!...Must Brexit!

    20 33.90%
  • NO!...We Must Remain!

    31 52.54%
  • I have no idea what I want, yet I will vote anyway!

    8 13.56%
Page 16 of 39 FirstFirst ... 61112131415161718192021263136 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 955

Thread: BREXIT --->

  1. #376
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    "Alas, the storm is come again! My best way is to creep under his gaberdine; there is no other shelter hereabout: misery acquaints a man with strange bed-fellows."

    But yeah, I'm not so convinced by it either. Going from being one of the big three in the EU to a junior partner in an US enterprise is probably quite unpalatable.
    Last edited by Starker; 27th Jun 2016 at 05:49.

  2. #377
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    So, everyone who thought you understood economics better than the IMF, I hope at the very least this fucking catastrophe has given you a better understanding of your limitations?

  3. #378
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: The Land of Make Believe
    They don't give a shit about the economic fallout, so long as they can walk along the street without hearing anyone speaking Polish.

  4. #379
    Administrator
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: above the clouds
    The polish workers at a local car wash do a better job than English guys at another. Why should my car suffer?

    Seriously, I'm not sure all polish people will suddenly be kicked out. Many local agricultural businesses would fall apart without them. I mean local to me in southern England.

  5. #380
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands

  6. #381
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    You mean this?

  7. #382
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    Gryz, just shut up for like a month at least.

  8. #383
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: The Land of Make Believe
    Gryz should shut up until the British economy has recovered to pre-Brexit levels.

  9. #384
    LittleFlower
    Registered: Jul 2001
    Location: Netherlands
    I didn't type a single word.

    Jezus, you guys are sourpusses.
    I didn't even vote.

  10. #385
    Member
    Registered: Jan 2004
    Location: Back Home
    What a mess!

    Tories - mess. Johnson wasn't even at the Commons for all the hoo-hah just now. There's got to be something amiss when I find myself wishing Cameron would stick around a bit longer... he had a great line about appearing with Tim Farron and Gordon Brown as "a unique but apparently ultimately unconvincing trinity" during the campaign. If you can't laugh you'd be crying.

    Labour - super mess. I'm torn - unfortunately I think Corbyn wasn't particularly effective (although I do wonder how many of these stories about him "sabotaging" the Remain campaign are simply Labour MPs engaged in their favourite pursuit of destabilising their party). Even with a new leader they still won't "get" or be got by the majority of Brexiters/ex-Labour UKIP supporters.

    Meanwhile we have the prospect of Boris or Theresa May becoming PM, manipulating the Brexit negotiations/delaying article 50 to more or less maintain the status quo, presumably to the rising anger and disillusionment of the more Farage-inclined Brexiters. Or indeed Nicola Sturgeon (god bless her) attempting to block the whole thing through the Scottish Parliament. Johnson's article today basically saying "well, the only thing that will really change is the ECJ and the laws". Uh, oh.

    At least we got our country back eh chaps

    Just in time for Wimbledon!

  11. #386
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    Relax, you guys aren't leaving anything. You're just sending a different negotiator back to the EU with a (presumably) stronger hand.

  12. #387
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    Is there even a shred of evidence for that?

  13. #388
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    Yeah I was thinking about the strengthened Anglo-American alliance angle, and while interesting, it'd no doubt get completely ripped apart as the UK going from an equal partner among 28 states in the EU to a glorified 51st state with the US.
    Actually, this article I found provides an interesting take on that, though it's from an American perspective:

    http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/25/...is-natos-gain/

    There are several reasons that the British departure from the EU portends a stronger transatlantic military alliance. First is the present state of heightened wariness among all NATO member states – and that includes EU members, as well as the United States, Canada, Norway, and Turkey — about adventurism by Putin’s Russia. The Kremlin’s goal has always been to be the strongest political entity on the continent, and it is likely to look for ways to further exploit the Brexit referendum’s centrifugal effects on the already fractious democracies of western Europe. Since its founding, NATO has provided the most resolute military balance against such efforts, and thus its stock can be expected to rise with publics in Europe.

    Second, with the withdrawal from the European Union, the military of the UK will have more resources and manpower to support NATO. Much like Norway – a strong European economy that is not an EU member but a staunch member of NATO – the United Kingdom will have additional ships, troops, and aircraft to deploy on NATO missions because they will not have to support EU military efforts such as the counter-piracy operations off the coast of East Africa or EU missions in the Balkans. They will be able to assign more and higher caliber officers and troops to NATO billets in the Alliance’s command structure – at the moment, many are “dual hatted” into EU and NATO billets or are in EU military structures.

    A third benefit for NATO will be a reduction in the quiet, but real, battlefield competition between NATO and the EU. Consider the respective anti-piracy military missions conducted off the coast of Africa for the past several years by the EU and NATO. Each has had different strategic priorities, with the EU working the “soft power” side of the equation more diligently than NATO. This competition has also manifested in Afghanistan and the Balkans, where both organizations over time have had different missions and priorities. Since the UK will no longer be obligated to support EU missions, its military will be able to focus solely on their work within the NATO alliance. And, given that European military efforts will be greatly diminished by the loss of British military muscle, the EU can be expected to defer to NATO more frequently. That will result in an increase in NATO’s workload, but also its effectiveness.

    Finally, a new British government will presumably be a very motivated NATO partner. Now that it has chosen to become a relatively marginal economic player on the international stage, it will have to look for new ways to demonstrate value in its partnership with the United States if it hopes to maintain anything like the “special relationship” it has become accustomed to (and dependent on). Britain will no doubt calculate that continuing or improving its good work in NATO – where it has always been strong to begin with – will be an important show of good faith.

  14. #389
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Qantas
    Quote Originally Posted by Vivian View Post
    Is there even a shred of evidence for that?
    I was half kidding. But only half.

    Maybe it's just my cynicism, but I don't take recent events at face value.

    It seemed obvious to me that offering a campaign promise to hold a referendum was just pandering to get euroskeptics who were leaning toward Labour or UKIP to vote Conservative instead. And besides satisfying a campaign promise, the main purpose of holding the referendum was for Cameron and the rest of his party's establishment wing to cut the legs out of the independence movement and consolidate their control over the Conservative party. They presumed the Remain side would win and I don't think they ever intended to really give the country a choice. If they knew there was a chance of Leave winning, they wouldn't have scheduled the referendum. Evidence for that is Cameron refusing to follow through on it.

    Now it looks to me like Boris Johnson was pushing the Leave side mainly to elevate his own status and profile within the Conservative party, and wasn't thinking seriously about where the country should go if Leave won. And that looks to be true for others as well. I'm an outsider these days, so I might be wrong about this, but it seems like the independence movement is not well represented in Parliament. Although 52% of voters opted to vote for Leave, a much smaller percentage of MPs want to leave. So it could be hard to find enough votes to select a new PM who will follow through with an Article 50 notification since Cameron won't.

    Another thing that will make it hard to follow through on Brexit is more pressure from string pullers such as banks, global corps, and the investor class in general who think they are going to lose out if there is any reversal of globalization. Judging by the market bump on the eve of the vote, it seems like most people just assumed Remain would win. Now that they see this is serious, I would think they would put a lot more pressure on the new party leadership to reconsider. They are now realizing this thing is too important to be left up to the people to decide, if you know what I mean.

    So one hypothetical situation is that the new leadership goes back to the EU and offers to remain if the UK is given more of the concessions David Cameron was looking for. And then the new leadership can claim victory, and if necessary hold another referendum. I think this is the most likely outcome, assuming the rest of EU plays along. Another hypothetical situation is that the UK goes through with the Article 50 notification, but then the resulting negotiation results in the UK staying in the EU with some modifications one or more of the standing treaties. Or maybe the UK leaves, but the exit agreement leaves in place most of the status quo.

    Lots of things could happen but the absolute least likely is that the UK leaves for real and tries to negotiate a whole new type of relationship from scratch. I know there are independents who want that and their number is increasing, but the vast majority of people with any power in or over government don't want that. It's kind of like Trump's wall.

  15. #390
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2000
    Location: Near Brisbane, Australia
    I don't see what would cause the EU to grant more concessions at this point. If power brokers in the UK prevent a split, then the UK has just revealed one big bargaining chip (we're not really happy with being in Europe and walking away is vaguely on the cards so you had better keep us happy) is fake, and they've given the rest of Europe the middle finger for good measure. How exactly do recent events give them a stronger bargaining position?

  16. #391
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    I read something about the EU being in a bind. On the one hand they have to punish the UK harshly for leaving to keep other member states from being tempted to withdraw (realizing any punishments may be reciprocal, e.g., allow tariffs or NTBs on UK goods and the UK puts reciprocal ones up in return and everybody is worse off, just paying more for pointless red tape), but on the other they evidently need to enact serious reforms in the wake of this to keep members in, too, and effectively 'reward' the UK for leaving and open itself to brinkmanship politics. Sucks to be them right now.

    The article I saw somewhere on the new relationship was mosly about the likelihood of the UK keeping the EEA part, like Norway. That's, eg, what the finance sector needs to do work from London. But the catch is the UK would probably have to concede freedom of movement to get that, and it'd be hard to get political will to concede just that one part after a referendum. But then apparently EEA access doesn't work without freedom of movement. So that was the ostensible dilemma there.

  17. #392
    Quote Originally Posted by SD View Post
    Gryz should shut up until the British economy has recovered to pre-Brexit levels.

    FFS it's been FOUR DAYS. A short term market crash as capital flees uncertainty is normal and is not a harbinger of economic doom by any means.

    Meanwhile, enjoy. As soon as the intra-day volatility drops I'm opening a long GBP/EUD trading position. Let's see who is laughing come 2018.


    I read something about the EU being in a bind. On the one hand they have to punish the UK harshly for leaving to keep other member states from being tempted to withdraw (realizing any punishments may be reciprocal, e.g., allow tariffs or NTBs on UK goods and the UK puts reciprocal ones up in return and everybody is worse off, just paying more for pointless red tape), but on the other they evidently need to enact serious reforms in the wake of this to keep members in, too, and effectively 'reward' the UK for leaving and open itself to brinkmanship politics. Sucks to be them right now.

    You're making the EU sound more and more like an abusive Pimp. "Why, he doesn't WANT to, but he simply has to beat the poor girl or else the others will realize they can leave without consequences!"


    Meanwhile...something I've long suspected but haven't said on here (since I don't have any publicly available sources to back it up) is now proven correct: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...economies.html

    That the entire point of the EU was to end European nation-states. Look up the person who was the intellectual "father" of the EU, Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, and see what he had to say. From his OWN BOOK (about as far away from "conspiracy theory" as you can get when they're publishing it with their name on it).


    The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals. …

    Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process. No wonder that this people, that escaped Ghetto-Prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe. Therefore a gracious Providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit. This happened at the moment when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated, and thanks to Jewish emancipation.

    id/Coudenhove-Kalergi 1925, pp. 20, 23, 50

  18. #393
    Member
    Registered: Apr 2003
    Location: The Land of Make Believe
    You make it sound like ending nation states is a bad thing.

  19. #394
    Quote Originally Posted by SD View Post
    You make it sound like ending nation states is a bad thing.
    It sounds like a great idea in the abstract. In practice, look at how it ends up every time somebody tries.

    In this instance the new "superstate" wouldn't be run by you or I. It would be run by people like Donald Trump or Dick Cheney.

  20. #395
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    So here's a half-smartarse half-serious question. What's the end game here? Not in terms of the next few years, but what's supposed to be the destiny of the UK that everybody's working towards now (or I guess maybe just England)?
    If I had my way, the endgame would be that Western countries mind their own fucking business, get along, and devote their energy to scientific advancements that improve mankind.

    Funny thing: the exact thing that you're mocking as impractical and crazy has been the model that Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Canada have followed. By all accounts it's worked out pretty well for those countries.

  21. #396
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    aaaaaargh tony

  22. #397
    Member
    Registered: May 2004

  23. #398
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    I read something about the EU being in a bind. On the one hand they have to punish the UK harshly for leaving to keep other member states from being tempted to withdraw
    That's like the situation with Greece. It sent a strong message, i.e. no, you can't it just go bankrupt and get the help easy way, because a few other countries would do that as well.

  24. #399
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    On the other hand, EU can't really take a hardline position either. It is in the best interest of the Eurozone (and the UK) to come to an agreement as fast as possible to settle the chaos and uncertainty. Already Italy is looking to skirt EU rules and bail out its banks in the confusion. Not to mention that far right movements and terror organisations are likely to be looking to exploit the confusion for maximum effect.

  25. #400
    Member
    Registered: Nov 2001
    Location: uk
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    The article I saw somewhere on the new relationship was mosly about the likelihood of the UK keeping the EEA part, like Norway. That's, eg, what the finance sector needs to do work from London. But the catch is the UK would probably have to concede freedom of movement to get that, and it'd be hard to get political will to concede just that one part after a referendum. But then apparently EEA access doesn't work without freedom of movement. So that was the ostensible dilemma there.
    I would be very surprised if the proposed exit deal doesn't say something along the lines of the UK continuing with all current EU programmes except CAP, fisheries etc until the end of the current multiannual funding period, join EFTA and start from the same sort of trading position in exchange for the same sort of free movement.

    Almost everyone would be happy with that sort of position as somewhere to start from.

Page 16 of 39 FirstFirst ... 61112131415161718192021263136 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •