Britain leaving the E.U.

As the referendum gets close, harsh possibilities are coming into focus, like this idea of the UK and it's people being 'punished' if they leave the EU.

Osbornes' punishment budget idea is one thing, but also we are told the EU will try to prevent other countries from following suit, by making an example of the UK. If the EU applies economic sanctions, member states will have little choice but to comply.

'Punishment budgets' and punitive trade sanctions sound ridiculous, but we need a better idea of how the EU really will react. Will the EU think it's a good thing to reduce the UK to an economic basket case? Sounds mad, but they did it to Greece etc.

Still a lot of unknowns, could be a bumpy ride either way. Which is worse? As before, I am for 'leave'. Whichever way people want, for the time being at least, it's a free country, they will vote as they please.

The EU is a toothless tiger on the brink of internal collapse and disintegration. And they (those self-appointed leaders) are already running (as cowards do) calling names behind them. Let them come. I for one would welcome it.

The EU is a paper tiger except for Germany, which is an economic and industrial juggernaut.

British astronaut Tim Peake has heard all about the referendum and says he would return to space in a heartbeat.

Seeing as how we have financed Mr Peake's little trip which he enjoyed so much I would expect him to put his cross in the 'Leave' box if only to show his loyalties to the country of his birth. Co-operation is one thing, subservience by virtue of numbers quite another. It's the duty of all to participate and then to co-operate with the outcome whilst watching one's back.
As for Germany - the conspirators of '53' have finally got their own way. What was unattainable by force is now available by stealth. Only we can stop it's gallop. Darwin's theory is the reality regardless of humanity and all its sentiments.

Darwin is usually right, broadly speaking. The referendum campaigns have brought the divides and multiplicities of the UK into the limelight. The next divide on the agenda is between those who will crawl over broken glass to vote and those who will be wondering where to park their cars whilst they vote.

According to the polls and guesswork, the two sides are about even. It appears a slight nudge of circumstance either way could determine the result. Apparently the origional Drakes drum is kept in a climate controlled place somewhere in the midlands.

Life's experiences have shown where intuitions and convictions are surprisingly dispelled. I would have said that it is always possible to get people to work together for a common cause. Life has shown me differently in that the 'common cause' survives only as long as the first dissenter and that thereafter the cause becomes slowly eroded with the end result in a more parlous state than at its inception. A free people have a free outlook and mind-set. What might be logical and good for all to some is to others the 'wrong' direction. And that in a nutshell is my opinion of the EU. A few decided that we could 'all' work together. A few were intelligent enough to know that for such to work it required the 'removal' of social democracy and the 'placement' of collective dictate. A few were intelligent enough to know that it would have to be accomplished by stealth and careful cunning. And 40 years later we are here. But what they fail to understand is the diversity of 'all' is such that many don't want their lives changing so rapidly or to the extent required for the 'dream' to work efficiently or as it was primarily envisaged. I have been with 'dreams'. I have lived with 'dreams'. I have suffered because of 'dreams'. Dreams are wonderful things - BUT - they are intangible and at best aspirational. The reality is always something else. Intelligent people don't know that because what they really lack is common-sense. Something they are too intelligent to realise or if so admit. Whatever the outcome I will only have to put up with it for a couple of decades at most or tomorrow at the least.

OK Now we've Brextricated ourselves, we will have to make sure any governments and administrations we have do all the good stuff that the EU did for us, like environmental protection, regional development, all that we heard about in the debates, and do it as good as europe, preferably better. Fairer, less divided society and so on to recover from the bad stuff of the EU. Time to re-build the fishing industry and so on, re-defend our territorial waters. Plenty to do, and not long, a couple of years, to sort it out.

As the world scrambles for resources to keep its millions quiet there will always be those who for whatever reason, power, greed or sheer malice, who will screw it all up.
Since the Second World War the idea of Empires, bigger is better, has gone to the wall and the world has reverted to nationalism and small is beautiful. So much so that even regions are now calling for independence or autonomy as the least preferred option. (Scotland, Wales and N.Ireland par example).
The idea of another Super State was out of tilt and stemmed from pre-war thinking that 'together' is safe regardless of cultures and resources when in fact the very concept was being scrapped across the globe. We are, and always have been, an island race with 'island' traditions and lifestyles regardless of the fact that some of our ancestors wished to steal the resources of our neighbours and set out to conquer the rest of the world as a consequence. Trade in the 21st century will have to be at the point of negotiation without the point of the bayonet. We are quite capable of doing all that if we do it sensibly and with careful planning - but first - we must extricate ourselves from the Super State mentality and concentrate for the next few years on shaking out as many of the indigenous ills that are now besetting us. (For example - houses, schools, hospitals, social care, roads to take care of what we have already accumulated over the past 50 years). The economic necessity of more and more 'bodies' to produce more and more wealth has always had a breaking point (when the bodies exceed the resource) which was why the immigration question was so prevalent with many in this last debate.
It's not a two year project. I would say perhaps another 20 before some form of equanimity pervades the population as a whole and the country's populace feel things are back under control. It couldn't be done as a member of a Super State with little to no deciding influences. However traumatic Brexit becomes it will be the lesser of the evils that this country will have suffered to regain some sanity towards its continued existence.

Not a 2 year project, but about 2 years before we leave the EU. Until then, EU laws still apply, as I understand it.

Correct. The Lisbon Treaty affords a two year period for extraction within which period all steps towards accomplishing the transition should have been executed. It means we have a small window of opportunity to set out the stall for removal and re-negotiations with the EU as a whole.
It would seem that the politicals are realigning themselves in order to be in the best positions for this to take place. The shake-out has already begun with Cameron and Corbyn, one out , one fighting to stay in place. The rot of the rotten has gathered pace and will end with the new bracing themselves for another General Election in the Spring of 2017 - if I am reading the signs correctly.
Then the fun starts.

cyfrifia wrote:OK Now we've Brextricated ourselves, we will have to make sure any governments and administrations we have do all the good stuff that the EU did for us, like environmental protection, regional development, all that we heard about in the debates, and do it as good as europe, preferably better. Fairer, less divided society and so on to recover from the bad stuff of the EU. Time to re-build the fishing industry and so on, re-defend our territorial waters. Plenty to do, and not long, a couple of years, to sort it out.

Pity the people pulling us out have no thought about our living standards and quality of life. They want removal of restrictions to help their profit.

You have been HAD, children!

Who are these people you describe as "pulling us out", other than the voters, johnb?

As a 'remainer' I am not surprised that you are a little disgruntled johnb. But there is something that most 'remainers' missed, including the arrogant, complacent pig-troughers of Westminster. Whilst you are no doubt reasonably comfortable (as am I) over a third of this country's population are not. Not only uncomfortable but they have seen a cruel diminution in their prospects and available expenditure over the past eight years since the 'crash' (which I might just add was done by another set of well-heeled pig-troughers) and quite frankly have had enough. THIS contributed to the kick in the balls by their voting 'Leave' and had far more to do with anti-establishment than any Farage or Boris effect. (I would qualify this by the numbers of labour voters voting 'leave' against their party's wishes).
I am well aware that the EU provided some barriers against the mis-use of the capitalist greed with reference to work and enviroment but it paled into insignificance for me and many others when put against the corporate advancement of globalisation by unelected (and thus un-removal) end-sayers.
The EU is not and was not what we voted for in '75'. Given that information at that time we would not have entered into the EEC. The balance has been readjusted and from it WILL come better understanding and a more balanced end product - be it in the EU or outside the EU - for neither has played that end-game yet. Fair Fortune.

cyfrifia wrote:Who are these people you describe as "pulling us out", other than the voters, johnb?

Those elected members who owe allegiance to business corporations with no vote, but an eye to profit.

Atlas wrote:As a 'remainer' I am not surprised that you are a little disgruntled johnb. But there is something that most 'remainers' missed, including the arrogant, complacent pig-troughers of Westminster. Whilst you are no doubt reasonably comfortable (as am I) over a third of this country's population are not. Not only uncomfortable but they have seen a cruel diminution in their prospects and available expenditure over the past eight years since the 'crash' (which I might just add was done by another set of well-heeled pig-troughers) and quite frankly have had enough. THIS contributed to the kick in the balls by their voting 'Leave' and had far more to do with anti-establishment than any Farage or Boris effect. (I would qualify this by the numbers of labour voters voting 'leave' against their party's wishes).
I am well aware that the EU provided some barriers against the mis-use of the capitalist greed with reference to work and enviroment but it paled into insignificance for me and many others when put against the corporate advancement of globalisation by unelected (and thus un-removal) end-sayers.
The EU is not and was not what we voted for in '75'. Given that information at that time we would not have entered into the EEC. The balance has been readjusted and from it WILL come better understanding and a more balanced end product - be it in the EU or outside the EU - for neither has played that end-game yet.  Fair Fortune.

So how does leaving redress the balance?

If massa wants cheap labour for his farms and factories he will get it. will he start paying 'Living Wage' (a non EU initiative, note)? of course not! We will have instead enforced 'on the job' training for the unemployed - at dole rates, not Living Wage rates, and no job afterwards. We will have more zero hours contracts, but with exclusivity arrangements attached - I wont guarantee you hours, but I guarantee that if you work for someone else, you won't work for me. And when all that fails they will bring in the poor and desperate from outside, legally or illegally and bend all the rules.

What will the Labour party do - same as it his done this last twenty years... nothing!

It redresses - the opportunity to put right the wrong of '75' due to disingenuous description of the Yes or No vote for the EEC/Common Market. I have no problem with trade. I do have big problems with political accountability (when there isn't any). You can bleat all you want johnb and tell me how wonderful it will all be with our continental cousins and everybody marching to Utopia behind the banner of togetherness. Total bollocks. Not possible. Never was. Never will be - until perhaps another 1,000 years has passed. Will our own politicians be any better? Probably not - but they will be OUR own. Put there by US. And removable by US, as and when the situation dictates.

If you, johnb, think some of our politicians may be motivated by personal profit and advantage rather than the well-being of the nation, I can't hear anyone disagreeing with you.

To say that such people 'pushed' people into voting in or out, describes the public as pathetically vulnerable to 'The Persuaders'. The whole idea of a vote is that the individual makes their own choice.

The 'Persuaders' sell us goods and services we don't really need, we are used to, and should be fairly immune to, that. Allowing anyone to sell or persuade us into being an independent nation or not is a different matter.  Sound a bit like "It was 'im wot made me do it."

I appreciate we are misinformed and manipulated, but when making important decisions, don't rely on the 'facts' presented to you, or you will end up, as people have, buying a house on a floodplain with an endowment mortgage that doesn't add up.

Being independent means living on your own wits and judgement. It's quite difficult, but so are some sudoku puzzles.

On the subject of the labour party, it's a painful sight to see them shaking themselves to bits. Reminds me of this bit of old film.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgV2iMJOs2Q at 0.46

I would have to say that I believe the public at large have been extremely vulnerable to the persuaders - how much evidence can you show me to the contrary?

Considering the vast majority take none or little interest in politics I wouldn't be surprised that many have been influenced in their decisions by rhetoric from others. That is par for the course and must be accepted by everyone involved. It is indolence and apathy that makes it so difficult to get rationality regarding our governance and why referenda is frowned upon by many as 'democracy gone mad'.
I would agree it is not the best way to keep social cohesion under control. It is however the best way of democracy being seen to 'be seen'.
The dye is cast and the colour set. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation we now have to live with it. Spilt milk and all that.
The best way forward is to all work towards the best results and leave the 'I told you so' brigades to their childish, unproductive (indeed destructive) playground activities and like rational adults ignore them. Fair Fortune people.

I am unable to produce any convincing evidence that our general public are informed and responsible enough to see through or resist advertising, bumph, or persuasion.

If your contention is that the British voting public, unable to tell talk from mutter, should not be allowed to vote on important matters, you may have a point.

If you believe the debate and referendum method is therefore null and void, it might have been helpful to mention that before rather than afterwards when you don't like the result.

What would you advocate instead? A roulette method of decision making, or, a pin the tail on the donkey competition?

First and foremost I am personally quite happy with the referendum result. Is it the best method for success - definitely not. Wholesale democracy always ends up with the tail wagging the dog. Result - chaos. But it is the fairest method in any full scale and true democracy.
So where does one go from there?????
It depends upon your personal views on 'methodology on the democratic model'. For it is only a 'model' derived from theory -.
My personal view is one of proportional representation. I despise the 'first past the post' which always disregards the majority of the whole. Elected representatives can then form 'like' alliances and govern for the allotted term to be removed or returned at the next General Election and so on -.
The ability of the public as a whole to chop and change by referenda is a recipe for endemic disorder and permanent damage and as such should only be used in the rarest of circumstance.
Does that make my position clear -??? One hopes.

I would argue that the representative democracy approach - elect a representative who will listen to the arguments and make informed choices on your behalf is th only way. This does, unfortunately become diluted to unfeasibility when they band together in parties...

Strength in numbers. Independents don't fair well and are only effective in hung parliaments. Given we have first past the post, and it doesn't look as that is going to change for the foreseeable future, the best scenario would be a hung parliament with a number of independents to keep order - i.e. to stop the excesses of political dogma whether they be socialist, nationalist, fascist or conservative. There are no fast fixes. I'm in favour of seven year terms. The absolute minimum period for the most effective strategies. With the usual safeguards such as 'confidence voting' to ensure the incumbents don't go off half-cocked. We have what we have. Such is our lot. For what good it does us.

A new phrase has entered the political media, "Brexit deniers". There do seem to be a lot who "love Europe" and think the referendum and it's result is wrong. Perhaps they confuse Europe with the E.U.

Many have neither the time or the inkling to find out. As long as they are reasonably happy they couldn't care less. Then when the question is broached they are usually ignorant of the facts or the differences. It's not surprising. Politics isn't everyone's cup of tea.