May has already stated that she won't trigger article 50 before the end of the year. So it's kinda fruitless.
General / Off-Topic UK Only - POLL - How would you now vote if casting your vote again for the referendum?
- Thread starter Nerwan
- Start date
May has already stated that she won't trigger article 50 before the end of the year. So it's kinda fruitless.
verminstar
Banned
Then think of it as a reminder that they better keep to their word...or they won't keep their jobs fer long ^^
When's the next general election? 2020?
She can do basically delay artical 50 as long as she wants until then and justify it with 'We're not prepared enough yet.'.
verminstar
Banned
Then tomorrow's march will merely be the first of many...the will of the people cannot be ignored forever ^^
We'll see how May does her job.
From the UKs perspective it's not beneficial in any way to trigger article 50 right now.
Being able to determine the start of the negotiations is the only trump card the UK has atm.
UK Purchasing confidence and activity at lowest since 2008 crash based on a survey of 650 manufacturing and service companies.
Expect many "Brexit disaster" comments in the media, but the actual report shows that Brexit is actually the straw that broke the camels back in a trend of decreasing confidence going back to 2013.
Any measure to increase confidence is to be welcomed...
Expect many "Brexit disaster" comments in the media, but the actual report shows that Brexit is actually the straw that broke the camels back in a trend of decreasing confidence going back to 2013.
Chartered Institute of Procurement & Supply said:
Any measure to increase confidence is to be welcomed...
verminstar
Banned
Well, it wasn't beneficial to leave the bloc either, according to some, and we still voted out anyway. May not be beneficial to trigger article 50 right now either, but we still want it done to make sure there can be no going back...ever. The feeling being that given enough time, the remainers will find a way of either reversing it, or delaying it even more and that is something many of us find unacceptable. Lawyers are a particularly slippery bunch who are trained to make a lie look like a truth and a truth look like a lie...it's sortof a long standing joke really but true nonetheless. If yer brief is one the good ones who cost a couple hundred or a couple brick an hour could probably get just about anyone off the hook regardless how serious the crime was...we have seen so many examples of this through the years so best not to give them time to figure a way around it.
Anyway...pretty much all over fakebook about the march so lets hope fer good weather ^^
Last edited:
Yeah, but submitting article 50 will not necessarily do that immediately.
It might halt the decrease in confidence, but an increase depends on the progress the negotiations make and in large parts on how the future relationship between the UK and the EU will look like.
It's probably best to scout the stances of the different head of states of the relevant EU countries and the stances of the EU officials before you start negotiating.
Because once you've started, there is no going back. So it's probably best to take every possible preparation before starting.
I doubt it.
Remember on the night of the referendum the pound soared as the markets thought remain was going to win.
And then it plummetted when the result was announced.
And remember - this has just come from the result. Nothing has really changed in terms of legality or the economic status of Britain. If, come January, the Prime Minister stands on the steps of Downing Street and announces that article 50 has been activated then you'll see a month or two of economic pandemonium, followed by a swift onset of a serious UK recession as the economy rebalances.
Yeah, but submitting article 50 will not necessarily do that immediately.
It might halt the decrease in confidence, but an increase depends on the progress the negotiations make and in large parts on how the future relationship between the UK and the EU will look like.
It's probably best to scout the stances of the different head of states of the relevant EU countries and the stances of the EU officials before you start negotiating.
Because once you've started, there is no going back. So it's probably best to take every possible preparation before starting.
I utterly agree. I think that the submission of Article 50 should be scheduled now, and delivered later. It gives everyone (in both public and private spheres) time to work out what they're doing, where they're going and what the post-Brexit environment will be likely be.
I'm not sure that the shock of delivery of Article 50 will be any different to what we're seeing already. Much of the market reaction has been investors moving cash to safer havens, so unless that cash comes back then it won't move again (i.e. that damage is already done). Of course, there will be some reaction - but I don't see any basis for the "serious UK recession" yet. (Obviously though, that can change...)
The UK government seems to be taking a fairly sensible path and I'd expect confidence boosting statements to appear over the next few months, plus a very pro-business budget (perhaps with a shedload of borrowing for investment).
Big caveat to all of this - I still believe that the EU will act in their ultimate best interests. Political intransigence may undo that...
Are you saying the experts were wrong?
Ever?
The young were pretty emphatic in their desire to stay, it was the grey vote that was mostly for out. All it will take is a few years for the demographics to shift, and for the economy to sicken, for Northern Ireland to start piling on the pressure, for Scotland to start insisting on leaving the UK.
There will be a call to rejoin, only this time there will be no rebates, opt-outs from the Schengen area, or snowflake status. We'll likely get the Euro too.
For those who are enthusiastic about Europe this could be a huge blessing in disguise. It's a matter of time.
A democratic decision like that is always reversible. Future generations might have a referendum to rejoin the EU. ^^
That fits better on a politician. Lawyers are just very good at twisting words towards their advantage. Downright lying is the dumbest thing a lawyer can do since, unlike politicians, a lawyer loses his job when he/she is caught.
That depends always on the case and the situation.
Anyways, I doubt that the government will reverse the Brexit decision, even if it should mean the end of the UK in its current form.
It depends what you mean by "reverse". What if they leave the EU but stay in the single market for example?
There is a serious problem here - nobody knows what Brexit actually is. Does it mean leaving the Single Market? Does it mean leaving the ECJ? The vote was on a knife edge, and there is plenty of evidence that many who voted didn't know what they were voting for and have since changed their minds. The leave camp employed a propaganda campaign bordering on illegal, with both lies and hate rhetoric at the heart of their strategy. Few, if any, are going to be happy with what happens next. No matter what there is going to be bitterness and division.
That isn't me saying those things as a remainer. Those there are facts.
If you're genuinely interested read this:
http://barristerblogger.com/2016/06...poses-serious-threat-parliamentary-democracy/
It explains, in pretty objective terms, just how much constitutional peril Cameron has brought upon this country.
Last edited:
verminstar
Banned
Yeah so heres the thing about Ulster leaving the UK...the political parties who supported Brexit were the unionist parties, who also hold the majority vote to stay in the UK, with those who want to stay within the EU being the republican parties who have always wanted out of the union, like Sinn Fein who are the political wing of the old IRA. So with that in mind (clear unionist majority) there will be no leaving the UK until that vote goes the other way...something that could take decades so I'm sorry if that blows that theory outta the water, but that record needs to be set straight right now. Project fear still not working, sorry to burst yer bubble on that one.
Scotland also has to first leave the union, then establish themselves as a completely independent nation before applying to join the EU. They might achieve that but there's the little formality of leaving the union first and that's where it gets complicated. Leaving the EU and leaving the UK are two very different concepts with very different consequences. I see this as nothing more than a hangover from project fear...nothing more, nothing less and I'm not even remotely concerned about a united ireland anytime soon. If ye lived here and understood the politics and the history, ye would know that already...but fact is that ye don't and yer just throwing out little random bits of mud in the hope some of it sticks, but however...time will tell.
As fer the young being emphatic about their desire to stay...this was dealt with already with the fact that many of the young ones who could have voted, didn't. So they either too lazy or they trusted the older generation. The majority of those who did, voted to stay in, but that does not equate the majority of young people here unless you have some sortof evidence to back that up with. In my own personal case, my daughter begged me to vote out because she fears a future in the EU...which sorta makes me wonder if this isn't just another project fear tactic which we been hearing plenty of.
As has been explained already but now must be repeated...project fear, project doom and gloom whatever ye wanna call it simply is not working...just makes ye look bitter and a bit sad ^^
Last edited:
I meant the decision of giving up the membership in the EU. What I mean with reverse is going against the referendum in order to stay in the EU.
Staying in the single market would reduce the UK to an associated country, which has basically all the same duties and all the same to pay, but no say whatsoever in the decisions the EU makes and gets no support. There are literally no benefits of downgrading a membership to an associated status.
Another possibility of staying in the single market is that the UK negotiates its own free trade agreement with the EU. The downsides of this are that it would take extremely long while the economy suffers and that the rule "The bigger partner determines the conditions" still applies. To get such an agreement the UK would have to swallow everything the EU wants. That's simply because the UK depends far more on the imports from the EU than the EU on the imports from the UK.
Both options have absolutely no benefits for the UK.
Cameron is, without doubt, an incredible idiot.
He circumvented the very reason why we have a representative democracy and not a direct democracy with this referendum. Disregarding the fact that the referendum gave two very simple options for a very simple question on a very very very complex problem.
With the situation as it is right now the country won't calm down no matter what you do.
It also doesn't matter for the international world what the UK does. If the UK doesn't leave, it's credibility (especially with Johnson as foreign secretary) get's destroyed. If the UK leaves, it reduces it's international importance incredibly.
The article about it was pretty good, but the last paragraphs in the article are a little distorted.
If the UK sends people to Brüssel to negotiate then it's already to late. There is no going back on article 50.
And the EU is in a far stronger position to negotiate. Without Germany and France being benevolent towards the UK it's certain that the deal is not beneficial for the UK in any way.
Statistics have been gathered on the demographics of the referendum voting and also their turnout was twice as high as first thought.
Well if someone has been filling her head with absolute garbage about certain people from certain places (which is nothing to do with Brexit and will be negatively effected by it) I can understand her point of view. It really isn't her fault though.
And as has been explained - there is no such thing as "project fear". These are facts.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com...ng-after-brexit-vote/articleshow/53336777.cms
http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/brexit-dents-global-economic-outlook/article8882241.ece
https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamesball/...pact-of-brexit?utm_term=.prXYG6Z4V#.iwwWEK5gV
http://www.southwalesguardian.co.uk...ate_since_financial_crisis__post_Brexit_vote/
Those aren't opinion pieces. Those are factual reports. They are all things that are happened that can't be denied no matter how much you want to put your fingers in your ears and go "lalalala doom and gloom lalalala". They're facts.
And those are just from the past 24 hours.
Denying facts doesn't make you look credible, intelligent, or even competent or mature. A mature person sees a fact and tries to deal with it. A competent person sees a fact and tries to understand and then deal with it.
As you've no doubt noticed, there is a certain lack of political and economic awareness on the part of many of the Brexiters. The benefits of downgrading are that we'd still keep the EU and the economic advantages it brings, yet they'd still be able to tell the brexiters we've left, and giving a knowing wink at the remainers.
Seriously. This is likely.
I don't think that's an option. Everything the UK does at the moment can also be done in the EU, and that's really bad for us. Any one of the nation states can veto any agreement made on account of their own interests (such is their "lack of sovereignty"
).Not only that, but the various Parliaments around the UK have demanded a power of veto over any deal done, as well as others demanding a referendum on accepting any deal.
So in other words, we leave, spend 3 years negotiating a deal, then the Daily Mail doesn't like it and convinces the public to vote it down again... then what?
France is actually pretty hostile to the UK right now, and it isn't just because we stirred up a hornets nest with the National Front. Let me break this one down.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...g-briefing-free-trade-free-movement-france-uk
Hollande is not only saying "Start article 50 now!" he is also telling us, in no uncertain terms, that he will not let us remain in the free market without free movement of people - and he is well aware of the focus on that in the UK.
He is basically daring us to jump. But why?
1. We aren't the only nation with a neo-fascist party like UKIP gaining traction. Hollande has La Pen and the far-right to worry about.
2. We leave, and France courts the big financial institutions in London, which gives their economy quite a serious boost that, up until now, the UK has enjoyed. Hollande will benefit greatly from that.
3. The UK falters, the economy shrinks, unemployment rises and a recession takes hold - a powerful lesson for the French people and a weakening the position of Hollande's domestic enemies.
and of course
4. Islamic immigration is a huge hotbutton issue in France right now. But if the UK leaves the EU. The French border authorities suddenly have a very easy way to limit the immigration of Muslims into France. Rather than stopping them at the ports and detaining them, as they currently do, if they find Muslim refugees/illegals on cargo ships bound for England the French may well simply leave them there to travel across the border. It's also possible they might actually "encourage" Muslims stowing away on such ships to move onto UK bound vessels. In addition, the Asylum "jungle" in Calais will have to be moved to UK soil, which will further give Hollande a boost domestically.