D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
We're actually in the sequel to the Truman Show, the execs decided the first version was too mundane.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The UK votes to leave the European Union |OUT2| Mayday, Mayday, I've lost an ARM
- Thread starter Hasney
- Start date
- Status
We're actually in the sequel to the Truman Show, the execs decided the first version was too mundane.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Now in all seriousness, there have to be some Brexit voters here on gaf, right? I really want to know what they think about this.....situation.
If Juncker is an "unelected career bureaucrat" then so too is Merkel. Both were elected to their positions by their respective parliaments. Only one country in Europe (Cyprus AFAIK) actually directly elects their head their government. Can people PLEASE start informing themselves on how the European Union works?
FlammableD
Banned
There've been a few, but they've mostly been run off by our dastardly questioning their position.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Why start now?
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
Yes, people should at least get the basics right and, even though I think the EU is a little too passive in "promoting" itself, it's still ridiculously easy to obtain information on how it works:
https://bookshop.europa.eu/en/home/
The Incarnation
Member
Plenty on the Daily Mail website. Ask'em there. Outside of your security blanket.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I think you can at least say the chains of accountability are less direct for Juncker.
Here's how David Cameron is elected:
Voters vote for their local MP. MPs then give confidence to whoever can form a government.
So it is voters ---> MPs ---> Prime Minister.
Here's how Juncker is elected.
Voters vote for their local representatives. Their local representatives then form a government. That government then nominates a commissioner. All of the governments together select a candidate by qualified majority. That candidate then requires the support of the European Parliament.
So it is voters ---> representatives ---> governments ----+----> President
voters ---> European representatives ---------------------------|
Gurgelhals
Member
Is it still too soon to come up with "Best Korea" jokes adapted for Great Britain?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Wait until Scotland and the North secede together and we have The People's Democratic Republic of North Britain and Her Majesty's Disunited Kingdom of South Britain.
Please provide sources that do not conflict with my existing worldview or that are in anyway challenging to read (lack of pictures, no 72pt headlines, no huge bolded words in paragraphs).
"Informing" oneself nowadays is more a matter of adding more agreeable white noise to ones Facebook feed.
KarneeKarnay
Member
This feels like some sort of Family Guy clip.
EU Snapchat
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
You know. I think I'm good.
accel
Member
You keep asking this question after I already answered it (I think twice, but at the very least once - you are *quoting* the answer). Here's my answer again - it's a wrong question to ask. There is *no* small set of regulations from the EU that, once they are removed, would promote growth enough to offset other losses from leaving the EU.
The benefits come in a thousand small pieces, a small piece here, a small piece there, all over the economy. Example: fishing.
The benefits coming in the short term are *not* enough to offset, say, demotion of trade with the EU to WTO rules. It is the long term benefits that are enough to offset and surpass that - in so far as we can reason about the future. Examples: the Financial Transaction Tax (managed to escape it after a great deal of bickering), the port services regulation (delayed for after the referendum in order to not affect it too much, still to land).
I even remember writing them a letter when I was younger and getting three huge packages with information.
Look for the banned tags in the previous topic.
smudge
Member
While I didn't vote leave, I did give it considerable thought. My constituency voted around 70% in favour of leave. Plenty of my friends voted leave. I believe the reasoning was based around a feeling of being disenfranchised by the ruling classes and damned be the consequences.
it's annoying how many people have just replied with "oh" after claiming the EU is undemocratic and then I go through with them the different bodies of the EU and how they are elected / selected.
the only time i didn't get that reaction was they pivoted to a different argument which was much less extreme than "the EU is undemocratic" (Transparancy and accountability) at which point I agreed with them but disagreed that it was a reason to leave the EU over.
Its amazing that when you sift through the bullshit voice clips how you can actually find out their real reasoning for thinking something and then explain your positions a lot better.
the only time i didn't get that reaction was they pivoted to a different argument which was much less extreme than "the EU is undemocratic" (Transparancy and accountability) at which point I agreed with them but disagreed that it was a reason to leave the EU over.
Its amazing that when you sift through the bullshit voice clips how you can actually find out their real reasoning for thinking something and then explain your positions a lot better.
EdwardTeach
Member
You realise that fishing represents an incredibly small part of our economy, employing only a few thousand people? It will continue to be a totally insignificant industry post Brexit.
There is no chance that a small boost in shipping (or a multitude of other similar industries) will compensate for losing thousands of financial services jobs.
The Meh Alliance of England and Wales
shinra-bansho
Member
Because your answer hasn't been an answer.
"Lots of small regulations" is basically the equivalent of "closing loopholes" to fund the economy in the vernacular of waffle.
The UK will become a great fishing exporter in the long-term, thus off-setting and surpassing the loss of financial services exports to the EU?
Do you realise how fancifully ridiculous this assertion is?
Seeing as leave was headed up by Boris and Gove, I just don't get that pov
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
"...new arrangements may not be more generous" should be the slogan of this fucking mess.
accel
Member
Example opinion:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=209110650&postcount=5507
Yes, I realise this, that's why I am talking about "a small piece here, a small piece there".
Yes, it won't compensate.
Read my post in full, you are replying to one word.
As above.
I don't know how else I can explain myself, you ignored 90% of what I wrote.
Also, if fishermen (fisherpeople??) Are given back "control" I'd wager there'd be a few good years for them, followed by decimated fish stocks and a bankrupt industry
I think you'll find that Hull recognises no King but the King in the North, who's name is Bean.
You literally just linked to one of your own posts that said "reasons".
I swear all Brexiters have one thing in common - being bloody vague.
So they have a safe space?
accel
Member
He wanted to know what Brexiters think, I linked what I think. Now you complain that my opinion is not this or that, Jesus.
Funny. Greenland might want to come back.
http://www.politico.eu/article/gree...rexit-eu-referendum-europe-vote-news-denmark/
http://www.politico.eu/article/gree...rexit-eu-referendum-europe-vote-news-denmark/
But everything will go great now.
Oops.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Your full answer was:
"I won't name any specific regulations."
This tells us you can't think of any regulations that would have a large impact either way.
"I'll assert there are hundreds of small pieces of regulation."
Fine, but this is an assertion. We have no reason to believe it without evidence. Can you cite any economics papers about the beneficial effects of leaving the European Union on our economy due to a reduction in regulation? Because if you can't, this is just complete hot air designed to disguise the fact you don't know what you're talking about and are hoping that saying "oh, there's hundreds of pieces" in a vague hand-wave covers your ass.
"I'll give one example - fishing."
You're right to get mocked for this, because a) fishing is less than a tenth of one percent of the UK's economy, and b) as I've cited above, is unlikely to change substantially anyway.
"The FTA and PSR would have been really bad."
These are two examples of things that *never happened*, precisely because we had the political influence to block them. However, if we want single market access, we will have to obey single market rules. The PSR will likely be part of the single market because it concerns competition policy. That means we still have to be affected by it if it potentially happens, only now we can't veto anything or change anything (a.k.a. "the Norway model"). The only other alternative is not accessing the single market. I'm giving you credit here and supposing you're not seriously advocating that.
"I won't name any specific regulations."
This tells us you can't think of any regulations that would have a large impact either way.
"I'll assert there are hundreds of small pieces of regulation."
Fine, but this is an assertion. We have no reason to believe it without evidence. Can you cite any economics papers about the beneficial effects of leaving the European Union on our economy due to a reduction in regulation? Because if you can't, this is just complete hot air designed to disguise the fact you don't know what you're talking about and are hoping that saying "oh, there's hundreds of pieces" in a vague hand-wave covers your ass.
"I'll give one example - fishing."
You're right to get mocked for this, because a) fishing is less than a tenth of one percent of the UK's economy, and b) as I've cited above, is unlikely to change substantially anyway.
"The FTA and PSR would have been really bad."
These are two examples of things that *never happened*, precisely because we had the political influence to block them. However, if we want single market access, we will have to obey single market rules. The PSR will likely be part of the single market because it concerns competition policy. That means we still have to be affected by it if it potentially happens, only now we can't veto anything or change anything (a.k.a. "the Norway model"). The only other alternative is not accessing the single market. I'm giving you credit here and supposing you're not seriously advocating that.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
The point is that it would very likely trigger tit-for-tat responses across Europe because to do anything other would be prejudicial to any non-UK migrant in Europe.
Its a shit-storm in the making.
The larger issue however is that noone is in a position to make unilateral assurances, not the UK government or the EU. In order to do that discussions/policy would have to be set prior to the enactment of art. 50. Something that is "impossible" according to the EU, and a neccessity according to the UK govt. Ergo, its a point of leverage.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Rowan Atkinson is naught but a bastard born in the South.
accel
Member
The damage from the EU to fishing has been huge. Heck, they even apologized:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...apologises-for-disastrous-fishing-policy.html
I think people voted leave regardless of those.
Yeah. But it's hardly a "stick it to the man" vote as the other man is just the same as the first man
First of all, the history of the word neoliberalism when it used to have a different meaning is completely irrelevant to the discussion, what it means and is now is what I described. And yes that fucked up system was created by American economists, Milton Friedman was the scumbag that popularized it and his mentor, whatever the fuck his name was, was the one who basically created it (even though you could argue otherwise since most of the ideas were already there). And I know what you're going to say, laissez faire is what they created not neoliberalism the way I'm using the word, yes in theory, in practice though even when Friedman was directly involved in neoliberal governments' policies it was always used to benefit corporations and banks with its principles being ignored for the benefit of the ruling class.
If you think that EU doesn't stand for corporatocracy maybe you haven't read enough about how Brussels works nowadays or the army of corporate lobbyists that are basically running it. Here, read an article I found from a quick google search to start you off: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/lobbyists-european-parliament-brussels-corporate
As for your last paragraphs, there are no words. You claim to have a masters in economics and you downplay the enormous advantage of a country having control of its economy and being able to devalue its currency in a time of need. The Euro is often compared to the gold standard because that's what it is for many countries and the reason why the European South is still being pillaged. As for the myth about the creators of Euro actually wanting a true fiscal union, it's complete bullshit. Germany, France and other powerful nations at the time would never tax their citizens to support poor nations. It basically comes down to this, the ruling class of powerful European nations created the EU free market and monetary union to sell their shit much much easier but NEVER wanted a fiscal union because that would mean actually paying for the enormous benefits for them of this union. Ever since, they have either decimated or taken over a large part of the competition in most nations with weaker industries and they continue to sell their shit to weaker european nations creating there huge deficits which must be "corrected" by pillaging the populations and national wealth of those nations.
I also find it ridiculous how you blame The German working class for this when they have been subjected to years of racist propaganda against the European South because their systemic media wanted to divert attention from the complete and utter incompetence and greed of the German banks which afterall were the ones that were bailed out in 2009, amongst others. Sure, this has nothing to do with neoliberalism, it's just a coincidence that the European ruling class keeps benefiting from this EU monstrosity over and over and over again while decisions that would require them to actually contribute for having these benefits are being postponed... indefinitely.
Sean Bean or Mr Bean, that is the question!
In their mind it was, and in the end that's what mattered I guess. They'll feel good about their poorly timed anti-establishment vote for a while. I'll give it a year or two.
Did you read the article beyond the title?
YEEEAH STICKING IT TO THE MAN!
*digs a bigger hole for self*
All those people have done have made it worse for themselves and everyone else. Politicians and "the man" won't feel any fallout from this at all. Every other person in the country will.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I thought I was the only one seeing the bloody irony /jk
I never said it was a good reason haha.
smudge
Member
I do agree, which is way I ultimately chose to vote remain. However, when the remain campaign was telling voters that the safer option was to vote remain, voting leave became about sticking it to the man. And looking at the aftermath, it was.
Jezbollah
Member
Yeah.. I saw that. You have an excellent point.
EDIT
EDIT: I only got the masters a few days ago guys, I just wanted to take it for a spin.My graduation ceremony is in two weeks!
Congrats!!!
Which situation? People resigning? I'm not too bothered, except for Cameron's resignation, as he's the one with the power to actually do things. I feel we should have a general election ASAP and that the various political parties should put forward proposals on how to move forwards, see what they come up with.
As for why I voted Leave, it's simple. I think this article is pretty much on point.
The EU is stuck, unwilling to go forward into what's needed (a federal European state), but with no support for that we're left in this terrible mess where Greek misery props up the German economy. The brutality that was inflicted upon Greece and the trampling of democracy there was utterly disgusting, and I believe that showed the true face of the EU now.
If "the man" is each and every British citizen, sure.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked