UK forum members, BREXIT?

[apis]

• the 27 must crucify the UK in order to demonstrate that leaving the EU is worse than staying in the EU. That will make any deal difficult.
• trade deals are and will be tied to the free movement of labour - which is the principal reason the turkeys voted for brexit. Not much chance of a compromise there

EU doesn't want to crucify anybody. Only idiots are interested in destabilizing other countries. EU likes britain and wanted it to stay. That's why britain had a lot of special priviliges in the eu like it's substantial member fee cut.
It's ok british people didn't like the eu deal any more and voted for brexit.
Now it's time to define/negotiate our future relationship. It's not ok to stall this process by not invoking article 50 and destabilizing britain and the eu for reasons of internal party policy.

Exactly, no one is interested in punishing or crucifying the UK, that's just stupid. Once the UK leave, EU can't give them special treatment though. EU will have to treat the UK as any other non EU country. EU can't afford to send the message that you can leave and still keep all the benefits while not paying any membership fee etc. If you leave you will have to manage on your own.

Conncerning the free market... The eu deal on it's free market contains more aspekts than just trade of goods. Free movement of labor is an integral part of that. Harmonisation of standards another for example.
I'am sure there will be a compromise between britain and eu. But compromise means for both sides taking some benefits and some disadvantages. There will definitly be some form of trade agreement. Probably without free movement of labor, if this is really a sore point for britain. But it propably won't be todays deal just without free movement, but some form of compromise.

Yes, there will definitely be a trade deal, but it will take time to negotiate, it will not be a priority for EU and it will not be as advantageous for the UK as the deal the UK already had. So it is a very stupid move by the UK.

[tggzzz]

Brexit will bring the decision making closer to the British people and will preserve the British nation.

Ignorant rubbish; the opposite is true. There's no such thing as "The British nation". Seriously.

As a starting point, it is "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". Great Britain is a geographical term, and contains Scotland plus Wales plus England. Scotland has its own independent parliament and legal system, e.g. trials can result in three verdicts: guilty, not guilty, not proven. So does N Ireland. And I'm not even going to try and describe the status of The Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. For more information, see the very amusing and accurate 5 minute video at


Scotland had an independence referendum two years ago, and narrowly rejected independence largely because it couldn't stay in the EU. Now they want a new referendum on the basis that the last one was under false pretenses. N Ireland may well want to stay in the EU, and rejoin Eire. (And I'm not going to discuss Wales, just because)

In other words, Brexit brings the distinct possibility that the UK will split into three: England+Wales, Scotland, N Ireland.

[apis]

The euro also dropped a little bit, about 2% compared to the pound 15% drop. That is: it might no longer be in a short while.

This is not even a peep in history scale . Compare with surrendering the sovereignty of a nation.

No, not a peep on a historical scale, but that doesn't say much. The pound is at it's lowest in 31 years. The nation states themselves are only about 150 years old. The sovereignty of a nation is worthless unless you're king/queen of said nation. For everyone else, what matters is that we have democratic control over the governing bodies. The little power EU have, we do have democratic influence over, directly and indirectly.

The larger the union, the less influence people have on their lives. This dilution is amplified if the political union is with different cultures, has obscure processes for selecting the leadership, and centralized bureaucracy keeps expanding its powers.

Brexit will bring the decision making closer to the British people and will preserve the British nation.

That is why the principle of subsidiarity is so important in the EU.
From wiki:
"Subsidiarity is perhaps presently best known as a general principle of European Union law. According to this principle, the EU may only act (i.e. make laws) where action of individual countries is insufficient. The principle was established in the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht.[6] However, at the local level it was already a key element of the European Charter of Local Self-Government, an instrument of the Council of Europe promulgated in 1985 (see Article 4, Paragraph 3 of the Charter) (which states that the exercise of public responsibilities should be decentralised)."

If I would be a Briton, I would vote for it regardless of short term economic impact. YMMV.

I assume you would also vote for an independent Texas then? And ultimately for the dissolution of the United States of America?

[tggzzz]

If I would be a Briton, I would vote for it regardless of short term economic impact. YMMV.

I assume you would also vote for an independent Texas then? And ultimately for the dissolution of the United States of America?

I think a lot of Merkins would vote to "offshore" California and Massachusetts

[doobedoobedo]

That is why the principle of subsidiarity is so important in the EU.
From wiki:
"Subsidiarity is perhaps presently best known as a general principle of European Union law. According to this principle, the EU may only act (i.e. make laws) where action of individual countries is insufficient.

But who decides that the individual action of countries is not sufficient?

I'd put money on it being the greatest centre of power in the EU - the democracy dodging Commission.

[Alex Nikitin]

Were it not for the US, you would be speaking German right now.  Don't forget it!

Besides a traditional american misconception, actually Soviet liberated Europe!...Sort of.....well, one totalitarian idea for another...same Marx and Engels crap.

Indeed, USA did nothing until Hitler was de-facto beaten by Russia, USA feared Russia would take-in their whole empire.
Warcrimes against civilians, like the Dresden Bombing, were mainly a showoff to the enemy-inside-the-allies.

If not for the supplies from the US (which did start in 1941) , the Soviet Army (which was only about 55-60% Russian, by the way) would not have a chance.

Cheers

Alex

[apis]

That is why the principle of subsidiarity is so important in the EU.
From wiki:
"Subsidiarity is perhaps presently best known as a general principle of European Union law. According to this principle, the EU may only act (i.e. make laws) where action of individual countries is insufficient.

But who decides that the individual action of countries is not sufficient?

I'd put money on it being the greatest centre of power in the EU - the democracy dodging Commission.

No, it's the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg. And ultimately if a member state doesn't like a directive they can ignore it (the only thing EU can do about it is give them a fine) and/or they can leave the union.

[doobedoobedo]

That is why the principle of subsidiarity is so important in the EU.
From wiki:
"Subsidiarity is perhaps presently best known as a general principle of European Union law. According to this principle, the EU may only act (i.e. make laws) where action of individual countries is insufficient.

But who decides that the individual action of countries is not sufficient?

I'd put money on it being the greatest centre of power in the EU - the democracy dodging Commission.

No, it's the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg. And ultimately if a member state doesn't like a directive they can ignore it (the only thing EU can do about it is give them a fine) and/or they can leave the union.

Ah, the court with no appeal that always finds in favour of the commission.

[apis]

That is why the principle of subsidiarity is so important in the EU.
From wiki:
"Subsidiarity is perhaps presently best known as a general principle of European Union law. According to this principle, the EU may only act (i.e. make laws) where action of individual countries is insufficient.

But who decides that the individual action of countries is not sufficient?

I'd put money on it being the greatest centre of power in the EU - the democracy dodging Commission.

No, it's the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg. And ultimately if a member state doesn't like a directive they can ignore it (the only thing EU can do about it is give them a fine) and/or they can leave the union.

Ah, the court with no appeal that always finds in favour of the commission.

The judges are appointed by the member states. And they do not always judge in favour of the commission. For example the court found the data retention directive invalid in 2014.

[Zero999]

• the 27 must crucify the UK in order to demonstrate that leaving the EU is worse than staying in the EU. That will make any deal difficult.
• trade deals are and will be tied to the free movement of labour - which is the principal reason the turkeys voted for brexit. Not much chance of a compromise there

EU doesn't want to crucify anybody. Only idiots are interested in destabilizing other countries. EU likes britain and wanted it to stay. That's why britain had a lot of special priviliges in the eu like it's substantial member fee cut.

Which was great and makes me sad about leaving.

There seems there's some resentment in the EU against the UK about the special privileges, probably out of jealousy.

It's ok british people didn't like the eu deal any more and voted for brexit.
Now it's time to define/negotiate our future relationship. It's not ok to stall this process by not invoking article 50 and destabilizing britain and the eu for reasons of internal party policy.

I agree. Our politicians have acted disgracefully.

Conncerning the free market... The eu deal on it's free market contains more aspekts than just trade of goods. Free movement of labor is an integral part of that. Harmonisation of standards another for example.
I'am sure there will be a compromise between britain and eu. But compromise means for both sides taking some benefits and some disadvantages. There will definitly be some form of trade agreement. Probably without free movement of labor, if this is really a sore point for britain. But it propably won't be todays deal just without free movement, but some form of compromise.

Although I'm in favour of free movement, I can see the disadvantages: migrants from lower income countries driving down wages, increased pressure on public services and wider fluctuations in population making planning difficult.

I don't believe everyone who voted for brexit over immigration did so because of xenophobia. I know Germany has had a lot of immigrants. How do you feel about this?

In the newspaper today, our politicians are telling that large financial institutions from the UK are making inquiries about the dutch possibilities if they want to move.
Our country has a very strict bonus culture where bonusses are strictly banded, so probably they will go to Frankfurt.

Let's be honest. They will do what they always did... blackmailing governments into the biggest possible tax cuts. I don't know if there is room for even lower taxes in the city of london, but if new tax cuts outweight the disadvantages of brexit, than they will propably stay there. If not, they will move to the 'cheapest' country in europe for their european business.

Yes, our government will have to give the money they donating to the EU to the banks instead.

Of course the EU wanted Britain to stay, if by the EU you mean Germany, Britain leaving is set to cost Germany another 2.4 billion euros a year at least.

That's pocket money in the sheme of things. Germany spends ~300 billion euros each year. Germany is more concerned about future trade opportunities with britain.

Same for the UK, really.

[rstofer]

If I would be a Briton, I would vote for it regardless of short term economic impact. YMMV.

I assume you would also vote for an independent Texas then? And ultimately for the dissolution of the United States of America?

I think a lot of Merkins would vote to "offshore" California and Massachusetts

Yes, I would vote to allow Texas to leave and I certainly support the idea of California leaving.  But I don't think I would get a vote in the Texas thing anyway.  It is strictly a matter for Texans - just like Brexit is strictly a matter for the UK.  Outsiders don't get a vote!

There are significant populations within California that are not well represented by the population centers of LA and SF.  Those two cities are massively liberal, not at all like the Central Valley or the northern end of the state.  That's why one discussion has the state breaking up into several smaller states.  I doubt that there will ever be a vote on this plan!

[zapta]

... I assume you would also vote for an independent Texas then? And ultimately for the dissolution of the United States of America?

I don't live in Texas, but I would vote for California exit and then move to Texas.

Seriously, we have similar problems here, more power keeps shifting from the local and state level to a centralized remote bureaucracy, so I will welcome shifting power and taxes back to the individual states.

[Zero999]

... I assume you would also vote for an independent Texas then? And ultimately for the dissolution of the United States of America?

I don't live in Texas, but I would vote for California exit and then move to Texas.

Not if Texas leaves first and their new trade deal doesn't involve freedom of movement so they can stop you from immigrating.

[apis]

... I assume you would also vote for an independent Texas then? And ultimately for the dissolution of the United States of America?

I don't live in Texas, but I would vote for California exit and then move to Texas.

Seriously, we have similar problems here, more power keeps shifting from the local and state level to a centralized remote bureaucracy, so I will welcome shifting power and taxes back to the individual states.

That is a problem everywhere. In southern Sweden (the Scanian provinces) everyone complains about the central power in Stockholm. It's the same in the north. And Sweden is a tiny country. Not all problems can be solved locally though, that is why cooperation on larger geographical scales are necessary. But it's also important to implement the principle of subsidiarity like EU does so you don't centralize power for no good reason.

Maybe the USA should try to implement the principle of subsidiarity as well.

[IanB]

[MT]

author=rstofer link=topic=69503.msg977487#msg977487 date=1467817641
I had quite forgotten about the Canadians.  I should add them to the list.

Its a silly list, dont see the purpose, dont forget to add Guyana while at it.

It's been a long time since I was over there but I thought I noticed a difference between French and German.  And  French is the
specific language I was talking about.  Yes, I realize that elements of the German language, indeed all languages, spill over into English.

No you didnt, you where initially referring to zee Germans..

I don't think I ever said anything about 'history'.

No of course not, how could you possibly remember anything with 1kbit "history memory", let's just read out some addresses from your buggy EPROM we-dont-do-dynasties-in-US  speech:

There may be others but history isn't my interest.

So there you are.

It's true that it is not a subject I give a rat's patoot about but my country wasn't decimated in two world wars although we did sustain massive casualties.  And, no, Russia had nothing to do with the western edge of Europe during WW II.  And the parts that they 'liberated' seem to have been swept up into their orbit.  Didn't they occupy east Germany for a while?  Seems like I read something about that in the papers.  Or maybe I was made aware of that when I was stationed in Germany in '66-'67.

The UK is the big European force in NATO.  If the separation gets ugly, how much effort do you expect them to expend defending Europe?  By the time Parliament gets done debating, the war will be over. The US is getting weary of war, I wouldn't count on us either.  It concerns me that we are placing equipment (and troops?) in eastern Europe.

Well, lots of random disorientated rants there, you dont seam to know which Germany you where in and since you "dont-give-rats-patoot- about-history" your bound to repeat the same mistakes history already describes and sure you did by try to minimizing the "very much larger" Russian casualties by playing the outdated "entire-planet-must-be-grateful-for-US-saved-you-all-from-the-nazis-dont-have-to-speak-German" card while deliberately not mentioning +100 000 dead Iraqis and creation of Daesh etc,  besides you seams not to understand fundamental NATO rules..so i leave it there since your rants much like zaptas just end in circus argumentation.

[zapta]

... I assume you would also vote for an independent Texas then? And ultimately for the dissolution of the United States of America?

I don't live in Texas, but I would vote for California exit and then move to Texas.

Not if Texas leaves first and their new trade deal doesn't involve freedom of movement so they can stop you from immigrating.

Yes, and they will protect their Mexican border so sneaking from there will not work anymore. Good point.

[MT]

That is a problem everywhere. In southern Sweden (the Scanian provinces) everyone complains about the central power in Stockholm. It's the same in the north. And Sweden is a tiny country. Not all problems can be solved locally though, that is why cooperation on larger geographical scales are necessary. But it's also important to implement the principle of subsidiarity like EU does so you don't centralize power for no good reason.

Its kind of a parody since those who sits in Stockholm are from all those places who complains! Also you dont become a prime/minister unless you have served long time as regional party broiler, and either have the party whip in your hand or stays in line with the dude who swings the part whip, like the "M's" bunker mentality.

But the really astonishing/outstanding feature part is that Sweden among the very few European countries dont have a constitutional court so in practice any civil servant who abuses the system goes entirely free, which has been proven many many times. And in the latest parliament voting to decide if such a court should be implemented the environmentalists and socialists vote no, no wonder!

[Macbeth]

There are significant populations within California that are not well represented by the population centers of LA and SF.  Those two cities are massively liberal, not at all like the Central Valley or the northern end of the state.  That's why one discussion has the state breaking up into several smaller states.  I doubt that there will ever be a vote on this plan!

Well there is always Rhode Island as an example of a ridiculously small state, at least in the great vast bigger is better american way of things. Though I think that is for historical reasons, the original Brexiteers if you will. Splitters! 

[retrolefty]

There are significant populations within California that are not well represented by the population centers of LA and SF.  Those two cities are massively liberal, not at all like the Central Valley or the northern end of the state.  That's why one discussion has the state breaking up into several smaller states.  I doubt that there will ever be a vote on this plan!

Well there is always Rhode Island as an example of a ridiculously small state, at least in the great vast bigger is better american way of things. Though I think that is for historical reasons, the original Brexiteers if you will. Splitters! 

 Yes, RI being one of the 13 original colonies that fought for independence, not likely to want their tiny state to be abolished or merged, but also unlikely to want to be independent by themselves.

 Once read there was (or is) a private cattle ranch on the big island of Hawaii that is (was) bigger then the state of Road Island.

[Macbeth]

Sweden is a tiny country.

Tiny? Have you looked at a transverse mercator projection map recently?

[System Error Message]

Seems like BREXIT was a scam all along. The people behind it quit after they won.

Seriously guys stop believing all you see on the media.

[vk6zgo]

Sweden is a tiny country.

Tiny? Have you looked at a transverse mercator projection map recently?

Guessing area from any map with "Mercator" in the name is a mug's game.
Look at a globe.

[Brumby]

Here's an image I prepared earlier....



Screen shots from Google Earth at approximately 10,000m altitude.

Sweden is larger than a lot of European countries...


Edit: Replaced image with a version that includes Russia.  (Russia was a stitch together of 3 separate images, to reduce the distortion over a curved surface ... because it's that big.)

[Tepe]

Sweden is larger than a lot of European countries...

Scandinavians tend to think in terms of heads, not area. According to that worldview, Canada and Australia are also smallish countries.