• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

maquiladora

Member
Another Brexit fan, Sarah Palin.....lol

ClvDNHjWgAAq2AX.jpg
 
H

Hasney

Member
bosseye said:
Sure. Here's a link to one paper I read by some independent economists that hit home for me:

https://issuu.com/efbkl/docs/economists_for_brexit_-_the_economy

As I say, I was thinking long term in seeing some change. Time will tell if I was right to vote Leave or very wrong, but I used my vote after thought and for genuine reasons.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I disagree with the leave economy assessment in general just because of the overwhelming evidence from the remain side, but I think we can get close to where we were before the referendum was even called within 5 years or so... It's just that these 5 years are going to hurt before we get there.
 
A

azyless

Member
Mael said:
We have French posters here that are for leaving the EU?
We have English speaking/writing French people that are stupid enough to not know that the biggest partner France has is Germany?
WTF is going on?
Click to expand...
Far right propaganda works great on dumb nationalistic people.
 
Carl2291

Carl2291

Member
Kristoffer said:
Jokes on the brits. Now that the UK and EU won't have an immigration agreement, there will be no way to get the pakistanis out of the country. They're stuck there, and they're just going to multiply until UK is an isolated, Muslim majority country. Anglos will try to white-flight away but since Scotland and Ireland will be gone, too, there will be nowhere for them to go. Delicious, delicious irony.
Click to expand...
This is fucking idiotic.

Grow up.
 
J

Jimbob Smalls

Banned
T

Tak3n

Banned
Ushojax said:
It's not a genuine issue if you look at the facts. Immigration is necessary for our country to develop economically and to maintain the quality of life for an aging population that will need care. Every rational person in government knows that, even Boris.

The understandable disenfranchisement of the people outside London is due to a lack of investment by successive governments, not by immigration. There are not enough houses being built and public services are being callously underfunded. Cameron cannot rebut the cartoon depiction of immigrants stealing jobs and houses because it's his own spending policies that are to blame. He was fucked from minute one, he had no means to respond to the xenophobia because telling the truth would just put people off him even more.
Click to expand...

This, and that is why i voted out, all on heard on here was that this is the Tories fault so you vote them out, but we have had lack of funding ever since the gates were open,(labour) and the horse has well and truly bolted....

We would of never got the funding to cope with mass migration, as such I lost all trust in UK government and as such voted to leave so at least the law will stem the flow, if Londoners are happy living somewhere that only the rich can survive comfortably that is up to them
 
H

Hasney

Member
jakonovski said:
Regarding this non-racist, non-xenophobic problem with immigration. What is it? What is UK's problem with immigration that was EU's fault?
Click to expand...

Housing and services being stretched basically, which really ignores that it's mostly lack of investment in those things rather than simply a case of more people.

If that is the case, I would wonder what the opinion would be if we had a 1 child rule like China did for a little while.
 
cormack12

cormack12

Gold Member
Was weird in work today. Everyone was just in shock. Couple of guys got into really heated debate. Nose-to-nose at one point. One had voted Leave and the other had voted Remain. They were both as bad as each other.

It's all just a bit 'muted'. The common feeling now among the 'Leave' people I know is one of uncertainty and 'Oh shit'. That covers older people and the in-laws (age range 61-75), and younger people and friends (age range 25-47). Almost all of them said that they never thought they would win, so voted for 'Leave'. Having had time to digest most of the reaction, I think it's sad that this is really going to impact the younger generation. The sadder thing is that all indicators point to this being avoidable had they voted.

The electorate was roughly 47,000,000 (I think, from memory) and we had a turnout of around 33,000,000. If the younger generation had voted with a bigger turnout then this was easily avoidable. You're talking about 25% of the electorate almost.

I don't blame Cameron for walking. Not at all. Why should he be the one to clean up Johnson and Farage's blunder? Personally, I'd prefer him to preside over the negotiations on trade as he would no doubt try to get it as closely aligned to the current EU agreements as possible. Who do we turn to or trust now to start these fledgling deals? Like really. We're in this position now, who would you task with drawing up the new agreements?

The worst part of this as well is seeing Theresa May being named as a candidate for PM. Someone who actively wants us to leave the ECHR to force through her policies on deportation and the now infamous 'snooper's charter'.

I have no problem with referendums in general, but it's clear here that there has been no intelligence from either side about presenting the electorate with the correct information to make an informed decision. You now have a position whereby the people dictating the outcome, have done the equivalent of sticking two fingers up to an empty room and ended up poking themselves in the eye. Mainly to show that they are anti-establishment, while also sadly giving more power to the actual establishment that is fucking the country over on welfare and NHS spending.

A vote dictated by the elderly which will cripple the NHS they will depend on more and more over the coming years. And yes, as some have noted they won't need to deal with this fallout for twenty years. But when cost and risk become part of making decisions on which patients should be offered operations, then their quality of life will definitely be affected.

Overall I think 'Remain' got complacent and as a result ran a very low-key campaign, convinced they had it in the bag. 'Leave' appealed to people's prejudices, and uncorked years of bubbling frustration with the economy and made whimsical promises - one of which has been openly dismissed on the day of winning (£350m NHS). In the coming months, we'll have to deal with many more renege's like this.

You'd like to think most people are liberal in their views, and that we're all pulling in the same direction. In 2008, when the recession was hitting immigrants pretty much helped us out of that hole by picking up the menial and shitty jobs we didn't want to do.

"We've a job to get anybody else to do the work," says farmer Cam Allan. "The rates of pay are above minimum wage. It's just finding the people to do this type of work we've got."

The agricultural sector would be in dire straits without the immigrants willing to do the hard graft on the land. Labour which can net workers up to £25,000-a-year with overtime.
Click to expand...

...that's not enough to entice some of the local lads picking up their dole money in Peterborough. A constant trickle of young men are in and out of the office collecting their state benefits. But there's little appetite for taking one of those vegetable-picking jobs of up to £7-an-hour. One group of lads:

Job for £7 an hour - "No mate I'd prefer to sign-on than do that."

"I don't want to work in like no cornfield."

"I don't want to work with a load of foreigners."
Click to expand...


Don't get me wrong, this can possibly work. I'm willing to let the dust settle and see what comes of it. But to make it work, it's clear that it will take a tremendous amount of hard work. And while I think we've just took a massive cultural step back in time to the 80's, we're stuck with the work ethic of the 'noughties'. I sincerely doubt we have the same brow-sweating industry and tenacity of the 'baby-boomers' to pull this off.

It just feels like the modern 'instant gratification' syndrome taken to the extreme. People have had their vote, been part of a fishbowl with the world's media and Europe looking on and are now done with it. Let's just leave this on my timeline/twitter feed and wait for the next big culturally significant event! There will be a lot of indifference and nonchalance until the real economic effects kick in and any new policies. Could be good, could be bad. The only real question to ask is why are we in this atrocious position in the first place?
 
P

Pancake Mix

Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Joni said:
There is no reason for the European union to suggest a deal that doesn't start with this. It would be the most beneficial for the economy while pissing off the leave campaign. Same reason fishing quota will be in there.
Click to expand...

The UK is not entering the Schengen Area as part of any trade agreement with the EU. You'd get more than ~52% support against that I assure you. The UK made it pretty clear yesterday that immigration is a key issue, and they're entitled to control their borders if they wish and so insist.

Relaxed Muscle said:
Scotland dosn't want to have referendums every few years, they just want to have another one ofter such a socialeconomic change like is UK leaving the EU (first country leaving the EU since it's fundation), which was also a key part of the last one.

It wouldn't be fair otherwise, because this event basically invalidates the last one.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, life is not fair, nor is creating a constant double jeopardy situation every single time provincial England does something Scotland doesn't like. The referendum was supposed to be a once a generation thing. Unfortunately, you have to take the good with the bad.

Acorn said:
Cameron is forever tarnished as the man that broke Britain because of backbenchers..
Click to expand...

We'll see...
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
TsunamiOfSwagger said:
WTF? How would leaving Europe make people of Pakistani descent leave the UK? Why would we want that?
Click to expand...

Ask Enoch Powell, the intellectual forefather of today's UKIP and the Brexit movement more broadly:

The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.

One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.

Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."

Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after...

A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries.

After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: "If I had the money to go, I wouldn't stay in this country." I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn't last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: "I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan't be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man."

I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?

The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children.

I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.
In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants. That is not my figure. That is the official figure given to parliament by the spokesman of the Registrar General's Office.

There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population, and approaching that of Greater London. Of course, it will not be evenly distributed from Margate to Aberystwyth and from Penzance to Aberdeen. Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population.
As time goes on, the proportion of this total who are immigrant descendants, those born in England, who arrived here by exactly the same route as the rest of us, will rapidly increase. Already by 1985 the native-born would constitute the majority. It is this fact which creates the extreme urgency of action now, of just that kind of action which is hardest for politicians to take, action where the difficulties lie in the present but the evils to be prevented or minimised lie several parliaments ahead.

The natural and rational first question with a nation confronted by such a prospect is to ask: "How can its dimensions be reduced?" Granted it be not wholly preventable, can it be limited, bearing in mind that numbers are of the essence: the significance and consequences of an alien element introduced into a country or population are profoundly different according to whether that element is 1 per cent or 10 per cent.

The answers to the simple and rational question are equally simple and rational: by stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and by promoting the maximum outflow. Both answers are part of the official policy of the Conservative Party.

It almost passes belief that at this moment 20 or 30 additional immigrant children are arriving from overseas in Wolverhampton alone every week - and that means 15 or 20 additional families a decade or two hence. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen...

I stress the words "for settlement." This has nothing to do with the entry of Commonwealth citizens, any more than of aliens, into this country, for the purposes of study or of improving their qualifications, like (for instance) the Commonwealth doctors who, to the advantage of their own countries, have enabled our hospital service to be expanded faster than would otherwise have been possible. They are not, and never have been, immigrants.
I turn to re-emigration. If all immigration ended tomorrow, the rate of growth of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population would be substantially reduced, but the prospective size of this element in the population would still leave the basic character of the national danger unaffected. This can only be tackled while a considerable proportion of the total still comprises persons who entered this country during the last ten years or so.

Hence the urgency of implementing now the second element of the Conservative Party's policy: the encouragement of re-emigration.

Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent.

Nobody knows, because no such policy has yet been attempted. I can only say that, even at present, immigrants in my own constituency from time to time come to me, asking if I can find them assistance to return home. If such a policy were adopted and pursued with the determination which the gravity of the alternative justifies, the resultant outflow could appreciably alter the prospects...

... In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.
I am going to allow just one of those hundreds of people to speak for me:

“Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one white (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her white tenants moved out.

“The day after the last one left, she was awakened at 7am by two Negroes who wanted to use her 'phone to contact their employer. When she refused, as she would have refused any stranger at such an hour, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked but for the chain on her door. Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, "Racial prejudice won't get you anywhere in this country." So she went home.

“The telephone is her lifeline. Her family pay the bill, and help her out as best they can. Immigrants have offered to buy her house - at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. "Racialist," they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.”

The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.

Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.

But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.

We are on the verge here of a change. Hitherto it has been force of circumstance and of background which has rendered the very idea of integration inaccessible to the greater part of the immigrant population - that they never conceived or intended such a thing, and that their numbers and physical concentration meant the pressures towards integration which normally bear upon any small minority did not operate.

Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. The cloud no bigger than a man's hand, that can so rapidly overcast the sky, has been visible recently in Wolverhampton and has shown signs of spreading quickly. The words I am about to use, verbatim as they appeared in the local press on 17 February, are not mine, but those of a Labour Member of Parliament who is a minister in the present government:

'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'

... As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."...

Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
Click to expand...
 
C

CitizenVectron

Member
EleventhHourSuperpower said:
While true, it doesn't change the fact that if you continue to have referendums with generous 50 percent + 1 vote wins in Scotland every few years, they will eventually vote out when they otherwise wouldn't. The 2014 vote was a once in a generation at most sort of bone thrown from Westminster. What the SNP wants is exactly like double jeopardy, essentially.



I edited that one out because I might be wrong about the Union Jack name, apparently it's a mess.

http://www.flaginstitute.org/wp/british-flags/the-union-jack-or-the-union-flag/

But yes, that's how it started for sure, and Union Flag is certainly correct too otherwise.
Click to expand...

I would agree except that promises were reneged upon. Imagine instead that the UK Parliament promised that Scotland could have 50 more members in Parliament if they voted to stay, and then after they voted they said "sorry, no deal. In fact, we're taking away 25." That is the same as the breaking of the EU promise. It's a material change, and regardless of whether it is a normal situation, I have no doubt it will result in an even stronger independence push than before. If Parliament doesn't agree to accept a new vote and public opinion in Scotland is 60% or higher, it's entirely possible they could unilaterally declare if the relationship became toxic.
 
B

Blackthorn

"hello?" "this is vagina"
Boris Johnson continues to manipulate his way to power, somehow avoiding the scorn and suspicion he deserves because he has fluffy hair and everyone calls him "Boris".

Everyone should pay close attention to what man has gained the most, and his history of treading on absolutely everyone and anyone to build Brand Boris.
 
G

GoldenEye 007

Member
Now these right wing xenophobes and racists are getting riled up in the US. Just great. Really hoping for a sound Trump defeat this November. My well-being and safety depends on it.
 
G

GamerMax73

Member
jakonovski said:
Regarding this non-racist, non-xenophobic problem with immigration. What is it? What is UK's problem with immigration that was EU's fault?
Click to expand...

EU membership allows for freedom of movement. Any EU citizen can live and work in any EU country (this is separate from Schengen which is about boarder controls). Because we have a successful economy we are a popular destination for fellow Europeans looking to improve their financial prospects.

Too many people are coming from other EU countries and living and working here. (allegedly).

Because we as a nation (nothing to do with the EU) have systematically failed to properly invest in schools, NHS and housing for decades we have a resourcing problem - too many people not enough resources.

The solution is to blame the immigrants instead of blaming the lack of investment.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
EleventhHourSuperpower said:
Unfortunately, life is not fair, nor is creating a constant double jeopardy situation every single time provincial England does something Scotland doesn't like. The referendum was supposed to be a once a generation thing. Unfortunately, you have to take the good with the bad.
Click to expand...

This is not an everyday situation of you goverment discussing trivial matters. UK is leaving the EU, this will affect Scotland for the decades to come, they deserve the chance to ask again their citizens.

Referendum was supossed to be a once a generation thing, UK leaving EU, starts a new generation in the Scotland society.
 
M

Mythos

Member
geordiemp said:
No, we said we wanted more control....a bit less EU superstate please.... we came begging for more before the election, and were told no, thats all you get, no way will you leave anyway attitude. EU just got too big.

We can all try and co exist nicely or all fight, we dont have to be in Euro or be in EU club to be friends.
Click to expand...

Well, you can have it all now, you will become isolated, if that's what you want.

Also, you have to see it from a different angle. EU is like a mother with alot of children, if one child wants something special, then all the other children would want it also, and not only that. There had to be a better way to solve this whole situation, but well, it happend, now we will all have to live with the consequences.
 
J

Joni

Member
EleventhHourSuperpower said:
The UK is not entering the Schengen Area as part of any trade agreement with the EU. You'd get more than ~52% support against that I assure you. The UK made it pretty clear yesterday that immigration is a key issue, and they're entitled to control their borders if they wish and so insist.
Click to expand...
And the European union doesn't have to cave to the Brits. They can give them the same conditions as Norway and switzerland if they want a trade agreement
 
C

call_kotaku

Member
All in all this whole thing played out exactly like one of my Crusader Kings games

you finally manage to upgrade your title to emperor and then change succession to elective so you can choose a good heir. But one of your shitty kids assassinates you before your good heir is ready and then your cunt vassals vote to destroy the whole thing
 
N

News Bot

Banned
SomTervo said:
It is not a genuine issue

That is a fact

Immigrants are 3% of the fucking population
Click to expand...

Tax dodgers also have a significantly greater impact than benefit claimants, whether they be immigrants or not. It really is smoke and mirrors to distract from the real issues.
 
T

twobear

sputum-flecked apoplexy
SomTervo said:
It is not a genuine issue

That is a fact

Immigrants are 3% of the fucking population
Click to expand...

I'm getting flashbacks to 'we voted for the Tories for real reasons like the ridiculous scale of benefit fraud'

'okay but the scale of benefit fraud is tiny, do you have any other reasons?'

'yeah we have to cut spending, we've maxed out the country's credit card!'

'that metaphor is economically illiterate garbage'

'okay but what about the ridiculous scale of benefit fraud...'

round and round and round and round
 
P

PdotMichael

Banned
Joni said:
And the European union doesn't have to cave to the Brits. They can give them the same conditions as Norway and switzerland if they want a trade agreement
Click to expand...

I love the entitlement of the UK that the EU is somehow under an obligation to give UK whatever they want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

[Reuters] More than a billion people worldwide are obese, WHO study finds
News 2 3
125
5K
Mistake replied
Playstation Laying Off 900 People - Multiple Studios Effected (Insomniac/Guerilla/Firesprite) - London Studio Shuts Down
10 11 12 13 14
694
49K
Woopah replied
These bugs come out at nighttime, and attacking victims, they silently kill or leave them with a lifelong infection
33
3K
Happosai replied
50 Cent & Live Nation Announce "The Final Lap" Global Tour To Celebrate Get Rich Or Die Tryin's 20th Anniversary (90 Concerts)
News
3
1K
Bloobs replied
  • Locked
Russia begins Invasion of Ukraine
News NSFW 639 640 641 642 643
32K
2M
EviLore replied
Top Bottom