Support NeoGAF

[accel]

Also, the distance between Riddick and blackcrane's arguments for why we should leave the EU, one arguing for a socialist utopia and the other a libertarian paradise, are a pretty good demonstration of how crazily contradictory most of the Leave sides' opinions are.

I actually find our positions agree on more things than disagree. In particular, the EU should have way less power than it has and national governments should have way more (if I am interpreting Riddick's position correctly). "Let us screw up our own way", of sorts.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Here's how Cameron is "elected". The Queen appoints him. That's it. The Commons has no say in who is PM. Since 2014 the EP now chooses who becomes Commission President and has the power written into treaties to reject any Council nominee that isn't of their choosing. The election of Juncker sets the precendence that the EP chooses the head of the European executive.

I think you're being intentionally dense here...

 

[King_Moc]

You are talking like it's either the EU regulation or no regulation. This is not the case.

Yes, there need to be some controls. The EU's ones were terrible. That's the point.

If only we'd had someone on the EU Fisheries committee that could have showed up and fought our corner.

 

[Joni]

The only issue with that is cod is still the most popular and is a bitch to breed.

Cod is no longer the most popular British seafood, it is salmon. Cod was popular because it was easy to catch and cheap. Considering that cod is an endangered species, continued unregulated high mass fishing on it would be irresponsible.

 

[inoperativ]

So, there's grounds to talk.

Well, I can tell you for sure that pretty much every particle physicist in the UK is freaking out pretty badly and the field will be damaged for a generation if the next government doubles down on no free movement while further cutting research budgets in the next round of austerity. Many started applying for European jobs months in advance just to safeguard themselves in case of a (then unlikely) Leave vote.

I myself am currently paid half my salary through the ERC (feel free to call me corrupt if you want...) and am on an exchange in Heidelberg. Pretty much my entire career has relied on free movement and Europe-wide funding structures.

 

[accel]

Except it will. I'm not sure why you ignore this simple reality. It is borne out in example. It is not controversial. Retaining access for a particular industry into the common market will hinge on compliance with EU regulation for that given industry.

That's why I wrote "unless that's made part of a bigger deal".

 

[kmag]

Except it will. I'm not sure why you ignore this simple reality. It is borne out in example. It is not controversial. Retaining access for a particular industry into the common market will hinge on compliance with EU regulation for that given industry.

I mean surely that's self evident to everybody? Unless your going for a line item trade deal (and even then!) access to the single market means you have to accept their legislation. The equalised legislation is the only way the market works.

 

[inoperativ]

Well, they'd leave a roughly equal sized void in London as they'd generate in the other cities combined. I wasn't really offering it as a reason not to do it (I don't care), but to say "No one in London would care" when you're talking about tens of thousands of well paid, highly skilled jobs is obviously not true.

Well, yeah. I don't disagree, my point is that a couple of thousand jobs like that will make much more of a relative difference in other cities than in London.

 

[accel]

Well, I can tell you for sure that pretty much every particle physicist in the UK is freaking out pretty badly and the field will be damaged for a generation if the next government doubles down on no free movement while further cutting research budgets in the next round of austerity. Many started applying for European jobs months in advance just to safeguard themselves in case of a (then unlikely) Leave vote.

I myself am currently paid half my salary through the ERC (feel free to call me corrupt if you want...) and am on an exchange in Heidelberg. Pretty much my entire career has relied on free movement and Europe-wide funding structures.

I understand, but that's, again (and again and again), short-term. Long-term, it might be better to do science outside of the EU. Because some of the regulations were quite stifling.

We'll have to wait to see.

 

[Maledict]

How on earth is Corbyn going to change anything? He completely failed to make an impact before Brxit with his anti-austerity, hard left message - now somehow that's going to resonate? When labour have been trying variants on it for the last 6 years without success?

Brexit doesn't strengthen Corbyn, it further weakens him. His young, liberal base are pissed off and looking for someone to champion Remain which he won't do, and labour can never out-nationalise the Torys and UKIP in the north. Given his complete and utter failure to communicate a message or vision beyond the same sound bites we've been hearing the last year (which have failed to make an impact) what suddenly is he going to become the great communicator?

 

[Micael]

You are talking like it's either the EU regulation or no regulation. This is not the case.

Yes, there need to be some controls. The EU's ones were terrible. That's the point.

As you said were terrible, although ofc they might still be, but they were reformed since that article came out.

"In February 2013 the European Parliament voted for reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, including measures to protect endangered stocks, and the ending of discards. The new CFP came into effect from 1 January 2014, though more talks with EU governments are involved. In presenting the reform package, the German Social Democrat MEP Ulrike Rodust stated: "As of 2015 the principle of maximum sustainable yield shall apply... Our objective is that depleted fish stocks recover by 2020. Not only nature will benefit, but also fishermen: bigger stocks produce higher yields."[25] The 2013 reform led to a greater role for the European Parliament, involving the convening of a trilateral dialogue (or ‘trilogue’) between the European Council, European Commission and the Parliament, to work towards general agreement on reforming the CFP.[26]"

It is a recognized problem, that in theory has been improved upon.

Adding to that, there is the fact if the UK wants to sell it's fish in the EU, it will need to abide by the same rules and regulations as the rest of the EU, so unless the UK wants to stop selling fish to the EU, nothing will change with the exception the UK would now have no say in the conversation.

 

[Jackpot]

Here's how Cameron is "elected". The Queen appoints him. That's it.

Right, nothing else influences it and the Queen is totally free to pick anyone...

 

[shinra-bansho]

I mean surely that's self evident to everybody? Unless your going for a line item trade deal (and even then!) access to the single market means you have to accept their legislation. The equalised legislation is the only way the market works.

Well, maybe there'll be a line item trade deal that specifies fish and science exemptions. Or maybe just a trade deal that only covers fish that specifically allows the UK to do whatever it wants and still export unfettered into the EU.

You don't know. It could happen. Anything can happen!

The best deals, very big hands, pull the hair - it's real.

 

[Maledict]

I understand, but that's, again (and again and again), short-term. Long-term, it might be better to do science outside of the EU. Because some of the regulations were quite stifling.

We'll have to wait to see.

I am so scared by people like you, and Taken. You have this view that it's okay for the country to suffer for *years* in the theoretical notion we might, at some point in the distant future, be better off. Might.

We're talking significant parts of people's entire working lives written off in pursuit of jingoism and a fairy tale that may never happen.

And the thing holding back scientific research in this country is not these mysterious burdensome EU regulations you are never able to identify. Hint - there's a reason science in this country so desperately needs and wants EU funding grants. Given the current government financial programme, and the downturn in the economy everyone even you agree on, how do you think we make gap that funding gap?

 

[EdwardTeach]

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.

I did read your whole post (hence why I said "boost to a multitude of similar industries"). My point is that piddling improvements in minuscule industries are not going to compensate for the loss of thousands of high paying jobs and the massive drop in overseas investment.

 

[liquidtmd]

I understand, but that's, again (and again and again), short-term. Long-term, it might be better to do science outside of the EU. Because some of the regulations were quite stifling.

We'll have to wait to see.

Short term could be 10-20 years.

You may see that as an acceptable risk. I'd rather have the job I'm in and our economy not fucking tanking in that time thanks.

 

[inoperativ]

I understand, but that's, again (and again and again), short-term. Long-term, it might be better to do science outside of the EU. Because some of the regulations were quite stifling.

We'll have to wait to see.

If by "short-term" you refer to the next couple of decades, sure. You can't just suddenly rebuild the infrastructure and professional relationships we are about to lose with a couple of years of increased funding, it takes years of consistent effort to build up this kind of expertise. To give you an idea of how important our ties to Europe are, it's a standard joke to call German the official working language of the IPPP in Durham since so many of the bigwigs are of German origin. This is one of the leading institutes in the world in my field of study (many would call it THE leading institute) and it manages to be that by being not just a British centre of excellence, but a truly European one.

 

[Micael]

Short term could be 10-20 years.

You may see that as an acceptable risk. I'd rather have the job I'm in and our economy not fucking tanking in that time thanks.

There is also a link between increased poverty and mortality rates, so you know.

 

[d9b]

German car manufacturers. Any minute now.

 

[Jisgsaw]

Excellent summary of the last week in UK politics

https://www.buzzfeed.com/lukebailey/the-crisis-explained-maybe?utm_term=.ewrP8qDxz#.we05wQJB8

That made for a funny read... until you realize it's not fiction, but actually what happened.

What a shitshow, my god. And with all that, UK somehow has to manage the most complicated legal discussions in the history of mankind to entangle itself from the EU.
Good luck UK.

 

[Dougald]

Without saying too much, I have family in UK research, and every one of their friends/colleagues are utterly despondent. The brain drain alone is going to be a disaster for the field

 

[Maledict]

If by "short-term" you refer to the next couple of decades, sure. You can't just suddenly rebuild the infrastructure and professional relationships we are about to lose with a couple of years of increased funding, it takes years of consistent effort to build up this kind of expertise. To give you an idea of how important our ties to Europe are, it's a standard joke to call German the official working language of the IPPP in Durham since so many of the bigwigs are indeed of German origin. This is one of the leading institutes in the world in my field of study (many would call it THE leading institute) and it manages to be that by being not just a British centre of excellence, but a truly European one.

Yes but in 20 years time we will be able to fish our own cod without some buearocrat in Brussels telling us we can't depopulate the entire North Sea. Isn't that dignity, that essential British spirit, more important than a few thousand jobs in one of the most cutting edge research fields in the world?

 

[Croyles]

Well, I can tell you for sure that pretty much every particle physicist in the UK is freaking out pretty badly and the field will be damaged for a generation if the next government doubles down on no free movement while further cutting research budgets in the next round of austerity. Many started applying for European jobs months in advance just to safeguard themselves in case of a (then unlikely) Leave vote.

I myself am currently paid half my salary through the ERC (feel free to call me corrupt if you want...) and am on an exchange in Heidelberg. Pretty much my entire career has relied on free movement and Europe-wide funding structures.

Off topic but:
Oh man, Heidelberg is my home town. Beautiful place.

I'd imagine Heidelberg isn't too happy with Brexit either. Oldest University in Germany, high amount of scientific and medical research including many exchange students and migrants from all over the world. Lot's of collaboration efforts with other European Unis etc.

 

[accel]

I did read your whole post (hence why I said "boost to a multitude of similar industries"). My point is that piddling improvements in minuscule industries are not going to compensate for the loss of thousands of high paying jobs and the massive drop in overseas investment.

There's a misunderstanding.

I replied to this already with "Yes, it won't compensate." I guess I should have been clearer.

As I said, "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." In my opinion, anyway.

I agree there is a great deal of uncertainty regarding the long-term, greater than regarding the short-term, but the balance of it (for me) is the Leave vote.

 

[ferrasvansen]

Without saying too much, I have family in UK research, and every one of their friends/colleagues are utterly despondent. The brain drain alone is going to be a disaster for the field

Yeah I still retain friends in both Microbiology and pharmaceutical areas of interest. They are gutted and quite a lot have told me working abroad may be the only way to keep in amongst the leading lights of their fields. The effect on our science and research abilities will reduce us to similar output as a third world country was how one of my friends put it last week during a Skype call.

 

[EdwardTeach]

I understand, but that's, again (and again and again), short-term. Long-term, it might be better to do science outside of the EU. Because some of the regulations were quite stifling.

We'll have to wait to see.

What are you talking about? What regulations were stifling? No one in academic research was arguing the case for the Brexit, it was universally declaimed as something that would be immensely damaging.

If you are referring to grumbles about clinical trials regulations, that I have see you mention before, you do realised that we still need to abide by the European rules even after brexit. Relatively speaking we are a tiny market for pharmaceuticals. Pharma companies are not going to want to run duplicate sets of trials for the UK and Europe. Trials will continue to be done on a Europe wide basis, with standardised rules.

 

[Oriel]

I mean, in practical terms, the Queen hasn't refused to appoint the leader of the largest party in the largest coalition since Sir William Harcourt was passed over for Earl Rosenberry in 1894. It might not be constitutionally explicit, but since the UK is largely governed by convention, the Prime Minister is de facto decided by the dual process of elections in the House of Commons and internal party proceedings.

The EP may have veto power over the President, but they don't have right of nomination, which they should - that shouldn't be a matter for the Council. The head of the European executive should also be drawn from the European Parliament itself (as is standard for parliamentary models), rather than the Commission.

I would argue that the EU is evolving into a parliamentary democracy, and already quite far on in that respect. Funnily enough it is the UK model of unwritten convention and custom that the EU is emulating. The precedence of Parliament effectively deciding who becomes Commission President (European Prime Minister in all but name) has now been set, much to Merkel's annoyance. She and Cameron were the most hostile to the idea of Parliament having any say in who becomes President it should be remembered.

In time we likely will see the EP appoint the EC President from among its ranks, along with Commissioners (Ministers), as is the norm in most European countries. That probably won't stop the moronic chants of "unelected Brussels Eurocrats" mind you.

 

[Dougald]

Yeah I still retain friends in both Microbiology and pharmaceutical areas of interest. They are gutted and quite a lot have told me working abroad may be the only way to keep in amongst the leading lights of their fields. The effect on our science and research abilities will reduce us to similar output as a third world country was how one of my friends put it last week during a Skype call.

We'll probably go from UK Universities attracting Europes best and brightest, to our own best and brightest going elsewhere, and not coming back

 

[Jackpot]

Long-term, it might be better to do science outside of the EU. Because some of the regulations were quite stifling.

Examples please, because my field has only ever been helped by the EU and in fact is very dependent on the international collaboration their funding requires.

 

[Maledict]

There's a misunderstanding.

I replied to this already with "Yes, it won't compensate." I guess I should have been clearer.

As I said, "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."

I agree there is a great deal of uncertainty regarding the long-term, greater than regarding the short-term, but that's the balance of it (for me) is in the Leave vote.

So you admit that in the short term we are screwed, but persist in believing we will be better in the long run despite having literally no evidence to show how?

You can't come up with this mysterious regulation that somehow cripples our country (despite the UK already being the lightest regulated country in the EU fully). You can't explain how high tech employment areas reliant on being in the EU work in the future. You can't explain how a service based economy negotiates trade deals that actually let us sell and trade services outside of the EU.

But this is all worth 20 years of pain? On top of the last 6 years of austerity? For something you can't even begin to explain to anyone here?

 

[accel]

What are you talking about? What regulations were stifling? No one in academic research was arguing the case for the Brexit, it was universally declaimed as something that would be immensely damaging.

If you are referring to grumbles about clinical trials regulations, that I have see you mention before, you do realised that we still need to abide by the European rules even after brexit. Relatively speaking we are a tiny market for pharmaceuticals. Pharma companies are not going to want to run duplicate sets of trials for the UK and Europe. Trials will continue to be done on a Europe wide basis, with standardised rules.

You first ask what regulations are stifling, then switch to discussing that the UK would still have to abide by the EU rules.

Was the Clinical Trials directive stifling to the UK pharma? Yes, it was. Same for the other example I gave. That's two examples.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Both dipshits end up supporting Thatcher: http://www.pieria.co.uk/articles/la...ship_with_friedrich_hayek_and_milton_friedman despite minor complaints. Not to mention Friedman basically being a close ally and advisor of the butcher Pinochet who also ignored basic principles of laizez faire when it wasn't convenient for multinational corporations and banks. Tell us more about how laizez faire isn't neoliberalism in practice, NOT theory...

This happens with almost all ideologies. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. You're also moving away from the key point now: neoliberalism is a nonsense term. If you're going to criticise laissez-faire, that's fine. That's an actual school of thought, it exists, you can say stuff about it. "Neoliberalism" is just an empty pejorative meaning "things I don't like".

Do you have a source on these numbers? If they're real and don't exclude a shitload of EU organizations you do make a good point but there is still the matter of accountability I mentioned before which makes lobbyists far more effective.

There's a Hansard paper here on the value of the British lobbying industry:
http://homepages.lboro.ac.uk/~eupp3/Site/Welcome_files/friendorfoe.pdf

There's an assessment of the value of the European lobbying industry produced by www.integritywatch.eu :
http://www.transparencyinternationa...015/11/Lobby-Meetings-European-Commission.pdf

I have already talked about that. The current administration is exactly like you're describing but things could change with politicians like Corbyn. On the other hand things have stayed the same and will continue being the same in the EU since it neither has an actual government the European people can vote for plus it offers precious lack of accountability for politicians so that they can pass whatever the fuck they want and blame it on EU.

Corbyn has absolutely no chance of getting elected under our electoral system; unless you can provide a convincing case to the contrary your argument is bullshit.

The EU does have a government the European people can vote for. The European executive is composed of the Commission. The Commission consists of commissioners, appointed by national governments, who are in turn elected by you. Want to change the British member of the commission? Vote out David Cameron. That's accountability chain one. The head of the commission is subjected to a vote in front of the European Parliament, elected by you. Want to change who the Parliament consents to? Vote in a different MEP.

Both of those things are easier to do than electing Corbyn, because the EC Presidency has rotated between the left and right wing of the European parliament relatively frequently. By contrast, a Corbynite candidate hasn't lead the Labour Party since, what, Attlee, maybe? And Attlee was a centrist leader by the standards of his time who went on to support Wilson, another centrist candidate, so in terms of leftism-relative-to-the-political-climate, a Corbynesque candidate has *never* become Prime Minister.

As for the rest of your post we basically agree that Euro without the fiscal union is a disaster but you refuse to acknowledge the role media and the ones who control said media play in that or who really benefits from such a fucked up system.

The main beneficiary of the Euro is the German Mittelstand. The banks haven't really benefited; they'd have done much better without a common currency area because currency transaction and speculations are hugely profitable. Why do you think the main financial services provider in the EU wasn't in the Eurozone? The bailout is neither here nor there; UK banks were bailed out, US banks were bailed out, presence in or out of a currency union makes no difference (not to mention the banks needed to be bailed out, the problem wasn't the bailout itself but that we'd put ourselves in a situation where international markets were so dependent on them in the first place).

And yes, I agree that the Eurozone has played out very poorly. But the UK was never and would never be a Eurozone member, so what on earth does that have to do with our decision to leave the European single market, which by contrast to the Eurozone, has been responsible for a huge amount of economic growth?

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

No one wants to lead the country? This keeps getting more and more ridiculous.

 

[Maledict]

What are you talking about? What regulations were stifling? No one in academic research was arguing the case for the Brexit, it was universally declaimed as something that would be immensely damaging.

If you are referring to grumbles about clinical trials regulations, that I have see you mention before, you do realised that we still need to abide by the European rules even after brexit. Relatively speaking we are a tiny market for pharmaceuticals. Pharma companies are not going to want to run duplicate sets of trials for the UK and Europe. Trials will continue to be done on a Europe wide basis, with standardised rules.

And the slightly amusing thing is that the EU agency which oversees clinical trials was based in London, and is already preparing to move. So we lose those jobs as well, but as you point out will still have to match EU regulation anyways.

 

[inoperativ]

Off topic but:
Oh man, Heidelberg is my home town. Beautiful place.

I'd imagine Heidelberg isn't too happy with Brexit either.

It really is! Although the weather's been shite lately.

Yeah, no. I think genuine disbelief best describes the reaction from most people.

 

[ferrasvansen]

No one wants to lead the country? This keeps getting more and more ridiculous.

Likely because they will oversea the country in a very bad economic climate, which could last ten years. It's like a hot potato and the main reason for such a lacklustre set of candidates and so few younger candidates for Tory leader, it's a potential career ending job now.

 

[Funky Papa]

I understand, but that's, again (and again and again), short-term. Long-term, it might be better to do science outside of the EU. Because some of the regulations were quite stifling.

We'll have to wait to see.

This:

a) Is patently untrue based on the absurd amount of intra-EU research
b) Goes well against the fact that many UK R&D programmes are dependant on EU funding and international teams

Either case, shitbinning a large chunk of your R&D capabilities at the same time you've absolutely buttfucked your industrial production and its respective exports because "this could turn out swell, let's wait and see" is not a germane move. As a matter of fact, it's the precise opposite of it.

 

[Oriel]

I think you're being intentionally dense here...

Go research how the executives of the UK and EU are created. The EP actually has a say in who becomes EC President. The Commons however doesn't have ANY say in who becomes PM. His or her appointment is carried out automatically and their support in the Commons is implied.

 

[SlipperyFishes]

I wonder if our next referendum will ask the public:

Should we begin a nuclear war?

That would be as equally as binding and just as stupid as this Brexit

 

[accel]

So you admit that in the short term we are screwed, but persist in believing we will be better in the long run despite having literally no evidence to show how?

You can't come up with this mysterious regulation that somehow cripples our country (despite the UK already being the lightest regulated country in the EU fully). You can't explain how high tech employment areas reliant on being in the EU work in the future. You can't explain how a service based economy negotiates trade deals that actually let us sell and trade services outside of the EU.

But this is all worth 20 years of pain? On top of the last 6 years of austerity? For something you can't even begin to explain to anyone here?

Everything depends on how much screwed, how short-term, how soon to the benefits in the long-term and how big they are or can be. Let's wait for the shock to die down when we can discuss actual numbers. Yes, I *don't* have the exact numbers, I have only rough thoughts, but that's par for the course, "predictions are hard, especially about the future".

 

[Oriel]

Right, nothing else influences it and the Queen is totally free to pick anyone...

Theoretically some military general could seize power and it'd be entirely legal. Isn't having no constitution (and thus no legal restrictions on the power of the state) a wonderful thing?!

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Off topic but:
Oh man, Heidelberg is my home town. Beautiful place.

I'd imagine Heidelberg isn't too happy with Brexit either. Oldest University in Germany, high amount of scientific and medical research including many exchange students and migrants from all over the world. Lot's of collaboration efforts with other European Unis etc.

Aye, very picturesque. There's also an awesome brauhaus near the centre (don't know the name) that brews it's own beer and serves this delicious dish with fried potatoes, onions and sausages. Ah man, I'm getting hungry just thinking about it!

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Likely because they will oversea the country in a very bad economic climate, which could last ten years. It's like a hot potato and the main reason for such a lacklustre set of candidates and so few younger candidates for Tory leader, it's a potential career ending job now.

Sure but that was their platform... They were literally pushing forth the thing that is apparently career suicide.

 

[accel]

Examples please, because my field has only ever been helped by the EU and in fact is very dependent on the international collaboration their funding requires.

I gave two here:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=209117094&postcount=5763

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Off topic but:
Oh man, Heidelberg is my home town. Beautiful place.

I'd imagine Heidelberg isn't too happy with Brexit either. Oldest University in Germany, high amount of scientific and medical research including many exchange students and migrants from all over the world. Lot's of collaboration efforts with other European Unis etc.

I lived their for a while and it was an awesome place. Want to go back eventually.

 

[Kabouter]

They could, but it makes the situation very nasty. Whats the EU going to do, counter that with we are going to deport all UK citizens out of the EU? I doubt any EU official will come out and say that. Maybe Juncker?

No, I meant call the bluff as in just ignore the threat. May is never going to deport these people given their role in the British economy and the fact that many will have integrated into British society with all the associated ties to others.

 

[Maledict]

Everything depends on how much screwed, how short-term, how soon to the benefits in the long-term and how big they are or can be. Let's wait for the shock to die down when we can discuss actual numbers. Yes, I *don't* have the exact numbers, I have only rough thoughts, but that's par for the course, "predictions are hard, especially about the future".

It's not par for the course when you are basically offering:

'Eat shit today, because at some indeterminate point we might not have to eat shit.'

That's literally what you are saying. Accept guaranteed short term pain for mythical, unreasoned gains sometime way down the line that you have so far failed to actually explain here. You are throwing away mine and many other people's livelihood in return for something even you can't outline in any clarity at all beyond mysterious regulations. That's great for those of us negatively affected by this decision.

 

[liquidtmd]

You first ask what regulations are stifling, then switch to discussing that the UK would still have to abide by the EU rules.

Was the Clinical Trials directive stifling to the UK pharma? Yes, it was. Same for the other example I gave. That's two examples.

Good news then - instead of stifling UK pharma, Brexit will fuck it up to the point we won't have much left.

 

[ferrasvansen]

Sure but that was their platform... They were literally pushing forth the thing that is apparently career suicide.

Yeah and that's what annoys me, stir up a hornets nest, potentially nuke the UK economy and then sneak away and pretend it wasn't their fault when it all goes down. Farage is well aware of the financial repercussions and likely this is his escape route, try to fade away from the limelight, well we won't forget Nigel.

 

[Maledict]

Yeah and that's what annoys me, stir up a hornets nest, potentially nuke the UK economy and then sneak away and pretend it wasn't their fault when it all goes down. Farage is well aware of the financial repercussions and likely this is his escape route, try to fade away from the limelight, well we won't forget Nigel.

Yes we will. If we were so fucking stupid as to vote for this as a country I am positive all those responsible will walk away scout free. I definitely have no faith in us as a country anymore.