The benefits of Brexit - the future of the United Kingdom

Discussion in 'World News, Current Events & Politics' started by emigre, May 26, 2018.

  1. kumikochan

    kumikochan GBAtemp Psycho!

    Member
    11
    Feb 4, 2015
    Belgium
    Tongeren
    I lived in those countries back when it wasn't Europe quite some time, 8 years in Hungary and 1 year in Poland and they were all basically as good as 3th world countries while they're thriving now because of the EU. Also how different economies when the EU clearly states wages sort of have to be the same as does pricing. Hungarians used to earn around 300 euro's a month when i lived there before joining the EU and now they earn almost the same wage people do here after the EU. In some countries it can be more expensive than the other but give or take the difference isn't astronomical like you're making it out to be. Why wouldn't it work in Europe when exactly the same is in the states ? Or did you really think prices are exactly the same when you travel from one state to the other ? No not at all, actually it is exactly the same as it is in Europe. Even wages differ going from state to state. So why are you complaining about it Europe wise when so many other big countries do exactly the same ? People always talk like they're experts on economics while they never ever have even left the comfort zone of their own country and lived in actually different countries and that makes them expert on all things related Europe how ?
     
    Last edited by kumikochan, May 15, 2019
  2. zomborg

    zomborg Makin Temp great again

    Member
    4
    Apr 17, 2015
    United States
    Still unclear on your meaning. Why is national sovereignty a joke in your opinion?
     
  3. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    In the context of Brexit it is. Northern Ireland and Scotland will leave the EU even though their people voted to remain.
     
    zomborg likes this.
  4. zomborg

    zomborg Makin Temp great again

    Member
    4
    Apr 17, 2015
    United States
    I see what you mean now. But trust me. There are greater benefits to leaving the EU than staying.
     
  5. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    Trust me, you have no idea where I stand on the issue.
     
  6. spinal_cord

    spinal_cord Knows his stuff

    Member
    9
    Jul 21, 2007
    somewhere
    Control of what exactly?

    I have yet to see anyone explain a single benefit of leaving the EU that we came do already.
     
  7. zomborg

    zomborg Makin Temp great again

    Member
    4
    Apr 17, 2015
    United States
    From an article by Jonathan Arnott MEP
    A: Benefits of not having to fully comply with European Union legislation




    1. The EU Procurement Directive won’t be able to force us to give State contracts to overseas businesses


    At present, we have to put contracts out to tender – often awarded on the basis of price. This means that local businesses often lose out on getting contracts, and creating jobs.

    Of course, there may be times when it’s actually in our best interests to award a contract to an overseas firm. But in a lot of marginal cases, the advantages to jobs and the local economy will far outweigh the disadvantage of an additional (say) 1-2% on cost.

    2. You won’t have to comply with the VATMOSS legislation, boosting jobs

    I’ve had various businesses in my constituency contact me, explaining that the legislation makes it very difficult for them to trade with other European Union countries. This requires businesses (even if they’re below the VAT threshold) to charge VAT at the applicable rate in the country they’re selling to within the European Union.

    One North East business owner, who sells low-cost technology (e.g. mobile phone apps) told me they were likely to have to stop selling to the EU because compliance costs outweighed the benefit of low-volume sales to other EU countries. Instead, they now trade more with America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (English-speaking nations make it easier to sell their products).

    Another North East business, below the UK VAT threshold in the UK, told me that by the time they’d added 25% Swedish VAT to their products and postage, they could no longer sell to other EU countries competitively. They had to downsize as a result.

    These examples aren’t unusual; I received quite a number of letters and emails from businesses in the North East about the same issue.

    Even the EU’s biggest fan, Guy Verhofstadt, has criticised VATMOSS.

    3. Compliance costs will be lower outside the European Union

    …and I’m not referring to workers’ rights, etc.

    Take, for example, the new GDPR legislation. I spoke recently to the principal of an accountancy firm which has had to spend substantial amounts of money on consultancy, take employees out of the office for training on the new legislation, and make substantial changes to the way they deal with clients. None of this has made the slightest tangible difference, but the overall cost of compliance is a substantial portion of the annual turnover of the business.

    4. You won’t have threats like the Copyright Directive to the free functioning of the Internet


    ….and no, I’m not against copyright enforcement.

    However, requiring ISPs, search engines, and social media platforms to use automated crawlers to delete content suspected of being copyrighted will result in the removal of substantial amounts of legitimate content as well.

    5. You won’t have to comply with EU State Aid regulations

    Sometimes it’s necessary to take rapid action to protect local businesses. When SSI in Redcar closed, there were many reasons: the strong pound (at the time), China dumping steel below cost price on world markets, high energy prices, etc.

    In such situations, it’s often appropriate to give State Aid to allow a business which should be profitable to survive a tough time (and when the State Aid is less than the redundancy/unemployment payments the State would have to make if it didn’t).

    However, Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU prevent the UK from giving such State Aid without the EU Commission’s approval. The UK government could hide behind that, didn’t ask for Commission approval, and SSI went under – costing thousands of jobs both directly and in the supply chain.

    The blame here should be attached both to the UK government, and to the EU institutions.

    With Brexit, the UK will also regain the power to enforce its own trade defence mechanisms, which would have avoided the delay whilst 28 countries all negotiate what to do. Different countries took different approaches; the result was paralysis at a time when we couldn’t afford it.

    6. Brexit should finally end the madness of double-testing products


    I visited a business in the North East which lost a significant proportion of its turnover once the EU’s Biocidal Products Regulation had kicked in. The problem: products which had already been fully tested to some of the highest standards in the world required re-testing because of new EU legislation requiring testing to take place at EU level. This led to the disappearance of some products from the market which could not justify huge fees being paid. This was exacerbated by an inability to receive the supposed ‘discounted’ rates.

    Jobs were lost as a result in the North East.

    This is nothing new; the REACH Directive had a similar impact on chemicals. Products which had already been tested to British standards required re-testing to EU standards, even when the EU standards were lower than the UK ones. This led to products disappearing from the market (Cutlass, for example).

    7. Brexit means you don’t have to comply with rules restricting ‘natural monopolies


    There are certain ‘natural monopolies’ in the country – the postal system, for example: it’s inefficient to have competitors duplicating the same work. In these situations, privatisation basically doesn’t work well and national ownership makes sense.

    EU legislation has watered this down. There are many examples of this, for example:

    i) Postal Services Directives 97/67/EC and 2002/39/EC leading to Post Office closures

    ii) Directive 2002/77/EC required the splitting up of the Directory Enquiries service, which has led to consumers being ripped off for £11+ for a 90-second phone call

    iii) Directive 91/440/EC impacts upon the UK’s ability to organise the railways, leading to the current mess of a system. (With this benefit of Brexit, there are caveats: it’s very much also the UK’s fault through underinvestment and mismanagement)

    B: Areas where the UK will be free to act differently



    1. The North East is a strong fishing region. Outside the EU, our fisheries will recover through reclaiming our 200-mile limit


    Since joining the EU, our fisheries have been decimated. EU quotas have proven to be completely ineffective, leading to the ‘discards problem’ amongst other issues – where dead fish are thrown back into the sea to avoid breaching quotas. The various attempts at EU level to resolve this problem have failed.

    In the meantime, EU-flagged vessels have the right to a majority of the value of fish in UK waters. Furthermore, the system of sales means that much of the ‘British’ quota in our own waters still goes to foreign vessels.

    Outside the European Union, conservation can be managed more effectively (Australia, for example, does this much better than the EU) – for example limiting time at sea rather than type of catch – whilst also giving North East fishermen more work because EU nations won’t be allowed to overfish our waters.

    Defenders of the EU point out that fish don’t respect national boundaries. This is a red herring; they don’t respect EU boundaries either, and much of our boundaries are with non-EU nations (Norway, Iceland).

    2. You can negotiate your own bespoke trade deals with third countries

    This should be an obvious benefit, but one question often asked by people who are pro-EU is this:

    Why would we get better deals as one nation than the whole EU27 put together?

    The answer is that the issue isn’t about ‘better’ deals but ‘more appropriate’ deals for the UK. Let’s remember that:

    i) The EU27 economy is the world’s second-largest; the UK economy (treating the EU as one) is the world’s fifth-largest

    ii) The EU27 economy is only around 5 times the size of the UK economy

    iii) Therefore, there aren’t many bigger trading opportunities available for third countries; the ‘bulk buy’ argument rarely applies

    iv) The EU27 is incredibly slow at negotiating trade deals; getting in there first provides huge opportunities

    v) The EU27 has to negotiate its own negotiating position with the Member States; therefore, individual national interests often conflict – the negotiating position itself is often a compromise

    vi) The UK would be able to negotiate far quicker and realise the benefits of trade deals before the EU27 does (noting that the European Union is likely to be only the world’s fourth-largest economy by 2050 according to Commission figures)

    3. The net EU membership fee

    The UK will, ultimately, save the net (not gross) membership fee paid to the European Union. The ‘Boris bus’ £350 million per week figure should not have been used (as I pointed out during the referendum campaign). The £180 million per week (or so) net fee is a genuine saving once any ‘divorce bill’ has been paid for the first couple of years.

    Pro-EU advocates in the North East claim that the North East is a ‘net beneficiary’ of EU funds. Whilst this is not actually true, even if it were true, it would be irrelevant: the UK could replace every penny of EU funds and still have the £180 million left over.

    This is actual cash; whether GDP rises (as I believe) or falls (as Remain adherents suggest) the £180 million per week would still be there.

    I also believe that EU funding could be better spent directly by the UK rather than on EU-determined projects, as I argued in more detail in Britain Beyond Brexit.

    4. VAT

    The EU-mandated VAT is one of the most inefficient forms of indirect taxation on the planet, costing billions every year to businesses and the Treasury through costs of compliance, fraud, etc.

    Outside the European Union, the UK will be free to choose a fairer and simpler form of indirect taxation.


    C: I disagree with the premise that immigration control isn’t a benefit of Brexit



    One of the key problems with uncontrolled immigration from the EU is that an oversupply of unskilled and semi-skilled labour drives down wages. Even if there existed a reasonable mechanism by which the UK might enforce the permitted restrictions on those who do not find work in the UK, uncontrolled immigration does lead to lower wages (hence, why it tends to be supported by big business).

    By prioritising skilled immigration over unskilled, this downward pressure on wages will be reversed – whilst developing the skills base within the economy.
     
    Last edited by zomborg, May 15, 2019
  8. notimp

    notimp GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    10
    Sep 18, 2007
    Example for VAT MOSS:
    src: https://www.freeagent.com/glossary/vat-moss/

    Great. So what you are now suggesting is either tax fraud (dont charge any value added tax on digital goods), or to charge the VAT of the source country? (UK 20%) Oh, all the jobs that this will create.. ;)

    Especially because this is only "direct to consumer", if you are dealing with businesses, they can get their VAT back (from their country). Oh all the jobs in the direct to consumer .pdf nitting patterns market. (Digital services - mostly.)

    This is also a perfect example of what people will skim off the top of a transaction in get rich quick schemes. Saving there, is not a valid business proposition for "creating jobs".

    And if it is (banking sector services...) eff your country. You've become fraudsters. As simple as that. ;)
    -

    On the other points made

    A1: Valid. But also, thats what a common foreign policy would have looked like. That you dont outcompete germanys, or frances most important industries, the first chance you get. (Not going for 'Divide et empera', got it? Also yes, you could complain, that then thats a cartel.)

    A3: Seems odd and counter intuitive. On GDPR certainly (there its valid), if you are in the tech industry - because GDPR was basically made to 'fuck people less' which currently is the tech industries main export (data for nothing in return, that doesnt run totally automated, and at virtually no cost).

    A4: Valid

    A5: Odd. I cant assume, that there wasnt a vehicle to do so anyhow. Seems odd. But if the case: Valid.

    A6: Misleading. Products still need certs that we accept for them to enter our markets. So this is a "if we negotiate well". At best. Its also double standard. You could just as well hawk on the UK certs, that are better, or worse depending on the product category. Also this is directly related to consumer rights, so its a sensitive subject. Simply saying "great, we saved us money there".... But well - double testing eliminated. How, though? (EU will still only accept certain certs.)

    A7: Non issue. Lie. EU will not make you privatize your postal system. EU will not force you to close post offices. Followed by creative arguing.


    B1: Valid. EU fishing industry fishes more in UK waters than the other way round. BUT UK fishermen sell more product into the EU (by a large margin), than into the UK, or any other countries. So the fishing industry isnt exactly happy. So fake out?

    B2: Valid. And (big BUT) you are smaller and matter less. So your deals will be worse. (If not banking on other political connections. (Five Eyes essentially)) Also, your biggest trading partner so far - hates you. ;) (But that is fine, because other countries around the world are growing faster (thats the thinking behind this.))

    B3: Misleading. The amount you've paid for other countries in the EU to be able to catch up - wasnt huge. Especially if you compare that with unrestricted access to the EU markets. How about we ask you for tariffs instead. ;)

    B4: Misleading. Polit speech. I'm sure the UKs tax system was, and will be a mess as well. :) (Reasons, its complicated. Everyone is out to defraud their brother. ;) Also - EU doesnt set VAT amounts. At all. The individual countries do. So - what the heck?)

    C: Wrong: Read OECD reports, people arent wandering. The amount of labor mobility has been below expectations on average. UK shot themselves in the foot, when not pulling a transition clause, when "open borders for EU labor" was first put into place (only they, Sweden and Ireland did open their borders instantly and fully) - so they got hit by the first direct "push" of people motivated to make their fortunes abroad. That petered down to a trickle. Also they were not 'unskilled' they were skilled labor competition. You are not complaining that they are taking unemploiment benefits, but jobs.

    edit: Also, and this is what shows you how messed up the situation is. People want to "make their fortunes abroad", because disposable income they get there is "worth more" in their countries of origin. So you go abroad for a few years, save up money (or send it home), and then life good in retirement (while having had an 'adventure' in your youth - if it peters out, if not - what a mess). Now - to lessen the pull, you put money in fonds, that allow lesser developed countries (within your union), to develop 'better' faster. Which is what the UK was paying for. But now you dont want to pay. And you want no 'job competition' ("our borders") and you still want full market access. By what measure of reasonable thought, arent you guys complete donkey asses? (Every man is an island? ;) )


    So impressive list of minor and larger points - but heavily skewed to paint a picture, thats not necessarily true. At least not for the bigger points. Probably. ;)
     
    Last edited by notimp, May 15, 2019
    spinal_cord likes this.
  9. Taleweaver

    Taleweaver Storywriter

    Member
    14
    Dec 23, 2009
    Belgium
    Belgium
    So...I only semi-followed the news. But apparently Farage himself is leading a brexit party. Not ukip (though I was lead to believe that that 'i' stood for 'independence'), but a different one. And it's leading in the polls. To me, this is only half surprising. The way the conservatives and even labor have faffed about, it's certainly not surprising that brexit voters aren't going to vote for them.

    My surprise is that this brexit party is getting so much (poll) votes. This is literally the same guy who left politics days after the brexit referendum. It's the same guy who sits in the EU, sabotaging it from the inside (and, in fact, would be one of the few benefits of the brexit: not having to deal with him anymore). It's the same guy who doesn't even return to his former party but rather starts a new one.

    If he wins in the election (and recent US history learns that he will), I give it about thirty procent chance that he'll become prime minister (given HIS personal history, my chances are he'll convince another party to join a coalition with him, the leader of whom will first be prime minister, and later the scapegoat for when the same scenario will inevitably occur).

    The chances of him succeeding where May fails...I give that about 0% chance. Turn it how you will, but as long as about 50% of the population wants to stay in the EU, any way to properly leave the EU will be met with severe political resistance.




    I can't speak on behalf of @supersonicwaffle , but I don't really understand the appeal of 'national sovereignty' either if in practice this means that everything gets voted down. I mean...wouldn't a European agreement mean more in terms of economic progress than Bercow bellowing "the nay's have it. THE NAYS HAVE IT!!!" all the time? :unsure
     
  10. zomborg

    zomborg Makin Temp great again

    Member
    4
    Apr 17, 2015
    United States
    @notimp
    Pretty impressive huh? I'm no expert on the UK or EU, I'm just in favor of national sovereignty. And even though you found many potential negatives to the points laid out in my previous post, you also found several valid ones.
    Personally, I think becoming a part of a global community might benefit some nations but overall you lose more than I can find acceptable.
    Disadvantages of being in the EU?

    1.Cost.
    The costs of EU membership to the UK is £15bn gross (0.06% of GDP) – or £6.883 billion net. See UK government spending. (UKIP claim that the cost of EU membership in total amounts to £83bn gross if you include all possible costs, such as an ‘estimated’ £48bn of regulation costs – or £1,380 per head [1]. The ONS has estimated a net contribution cost of £7.1 bn. See actual cost of EU membership


    2. Inefficient policies.
    A large percentage (40%) of EU spending goes on the Common Agricultural Policy. For many years this distorted agricultural markets by placing minimum prices on food. This lead to higher prices for consumers and encouraging over-supply. Reforms to CAP have reduced, but not eliminated this wastage. A significant existing problem with CAP is that it has rewarded large land-owners, with little reflection of social benefit. See: Transfer of funds from poor to rich landowners (Guardian) Though the UK is guilty of rejecting limit on CAP

    3. Problems of the Euro.
    Membership of the EU doesn’t necessarily mean membership of the Euro. But, the EU has placed great emphasis on the single currency. However, it has proved to have many problems and contributed to low rates of economic growth and high unemployment across the EU. Fortunately, the UK stayed out of the Euro.

    4.Pressure towards austerity.
    Since 2008, many southern European countries have faced pressure from the EU to pursue austerity – spending cuts to meet budget deficit targets, but in the middle of a recession these austerity measures have contributed to prolonged economic stagnation. In particular, Greece was forced by its creditors to accept austerity, when some economists have argued this is counter-productive.

    5. Net migration.
    Free movement of labour has caused problems of overcrowding in some UK cities. The UK’s population is set to rise to 70 million over the next decade, partly due to immigration (of which 50% is from EU and 50% from non-EU). Immigration has helped to push up house prices and led to congestion on roads. The concern is that in the EU, the UK is powerless to place a limit on immigration from Eastern Europe because free movement of labour is a cornerstone of the EU. See: Impact of immigration on UK economy
    6. More bureaucracy less democracy.
    It is argued that the EU has created extra layers of bureaucracy while taking away the decision-making process further from local communities. For example, the British Chambers of Commerce has estimated that the annual cost to the UK of EU regulation is £7.4bn. The introduction of Qualified majority voting (QMV) means that on many decisions votes can be taken against the public interest of a particular country.

    @Taleweaver
    This link describes why sovereignty is important. It's a 9 minute read if you have the time it's definitely worth it.

    Why sovereignty matters for national unity: a warning
     
  11. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    It's neither odd nor counter intuitive and most people will have an idea of how much money GDPR compliance has burned particularly in small medium bussinesses, there's barely any people who haven't been affected by it, while it turned out it's mainly a toothless tiger as the games industry for example has been caught multiple times violating the GDPR without any real consequences.

    Furthermore it significantly hinders European tech companies to obtain data which is required for machine learning, it was pretty much a death sentence for AI technology based in the EU and in turn for the EU being a major factor in the fourth industrial revolution. It's really funny if you talk to Germans about the fourth industrial revolution, or industry 4.0 as they like to call it, they have significantly different ideas of what it is than americans or chinese.

    — Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

    The point I was making is Bercow himself is a member of a union parliament not a national parliament. Brexit is not an argument for national sovereignty. Which is why "National Sovereignty = Good" is funny in a Brexit context.
     
  12. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23
    Nov 21, 2005
    United Kingdom
    I am dubious of a lot of those.

    1. The UK gov outsources endless amounts of stuff to the home grown outfit Capita, usually dubbed Crapita as they are so awful (they do must of the gov IT infrastructure). The benefits of a smaller pool then remain to be seen.

    3. I have not gone fully into GDPR and the cookies thing annoys me but most of what I have seen has been fairly common sense data protection/handling stuff, not entirely unlike the data protection act that such people would have been familiar with.
    " take employees out of the office for training on the new legislation,"
    They are accountants -- that shit happens every 5 months anyway. Such people tend to go on more courses than IT people.

    4. Yes UK gov take care of my internet access... oh wait porn blocks incoming and ISP level blocks on all sorts of weird and wonderful things for many years now ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_in_the_United_Kingdom )... yay such confidence that they know what they are doing.

    5. Yet when the Royal Bank of Scotland was after some money look how quickly that got unarsed, and the results of that one https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45500384

    6. I know MPs are not typically engineers (though this one is supposed to be a mathematician) but hahahahahahaha. Classic. We have had multiple sets of competing standards for multiple countries for... about as long as we have had standards (there is a reason I have a BSW/BSF/BSWS spanner set, a metric spanner set and a SAE/AF imperial sized spanner set). There is a reason why my lovely US DOT certified motorbike helmet is dubious to use on UK roads despite probably being able to handle worse impacts in some cases. The UK might once have been able to dictate a worldwide engineering standard but no chance today so it will be same shit, different face on it though if this does come to pass. Would also count for that other one where they could not be bothered to go beyond the UK only certs, and most EU certs are not that much harder to sort than those seen in US+ commonwealth countries (not to mention what I have seen has been pretty sane too).

    7."Post Office closures"
    Was that the directive or that nobody uses post any more so you don't need one on every estate? I am sure they will trot out some village somewhere that lost theirs and some rickety old grandma that suffered a bit as a result. Most were said duplicates (one in a town I used to live in had one on an estate, one maybe 600m away in a town, another a few hundred metres after that, and not far beyond that the main sorting office).
    Directory enquires is an interesting thing to ponder here. I don't know enough to argue any which way here, however I am drawn to wonder if that is a cherry picked example as most such things would go under very fast should they go in for those kind of pricings.


    On VAT. They are not going to kick their third biggest earner in the head -- taxes never get lowered, at best they change shape and more commonly inflation takes care of the raises, and all that. One that has been working for decades, longer if you count its precursor.

    Nice to see a bit more effort than soundbites but still came up a bit short from where I sit.
     
  13. shamzie

    shamzie Oh David de Gea <3

    Member
    7
    Mar 19, 2014
    Manchester
    What? I dont even know where to start. the USA is one economy, Europe is 28 different ones. That's one reason it wouldn't work. I dont need to have lived in a different country for me to understand the basic economic model going on here but if it helps, I've travelled too Spain, Germany, Portugal, France, The Netherlands, Mauritius, The USA and Thailand. Granted I never live there so I bow down on your amazing knowhow because you happened to live somewhere different from your birth country for a while. And yeah, the difference actually was astronomical, if it wasn't people wouldn't upend their whole lives and move to a different country just for work. Wages differ from the North and South of England ... So what? What are you going on about? I told you what my complaint was, one single currency doesn't work for 28 vastly different economies, my proof to back this is up is Greece Ireland and Portugal all needing bailing out (And probably Spain soon too) thanks to the disaster of that currency. Also yeah Hungary is thriving now while in the EU... Maybe you should do a little more research on what Hungary and their citizens generally think about the EU. But they're thriving, The U.K and Germany says you're welcome.
     
    Last edited by shamzie, May 15, 2019
  14. FAST6191

    FAST6191 Techromancer

    pip Reporter
    23
    Nov 21, 2005
    United Kingdom
    Careful with that one. While most people that would utter the phrase state's rights in the US I generally find to be... odd to say the least, and often living in their own reality, they are not without basis in their thoughts. Similarly depending upon where you are in the US you might find people identifying more with a grouping than the US as a whole; my favourites to wind up are "New Englanders" but there are all sorts of lines one might draw that mean things to different people -- many things with the word belt in it, North-South, Mason–Dixon, some aspects of Texas culture, the historical German culture, Appalachia.
    Historically there have been some considerable differences between things as well -- the rather forceful nature of the union (historical standards, and some other quirks, also being more forging when rights get trampled over in a bit to achieve it) giving it a lot of what cohesion it might be said to have today.

    Said cohesion is greater than what the European states have, and I would say the EU is fumbling their attempt somewhat to... heavily promote this greater cohesion before the proverbial chickens come home to roost (if they managed it then it would be a sight to see and a force to be reckoned with, and I don't fault them for wanting to try).

    As for Hungary. Orban is hilarious and sure there is a notable... are we using the word Eurosceptic for Hungarian politics? component within it but last polling I saw had generally positive feelings and no particular desire to leave*.

    *video because why not.
     
  15. smf

    smf GBAtemp Psycho!

    Member
    9
    Feb 23, 2009
    United Kingdom
    I don't trust you & I know for sure that you are wrong.

    The £350 million will just disappear due to the increased costs to operating outside the EU while doing most of our trade with the EU and the drop in sterling.

    There are plenty of clever xenophobics and sociopaths putting together some really good sounding stuff, but you don't have to follow them blindly.

    Trust me, we're better off in the EU. Although we'd have been better off without the referendum, because having a divided country for the next 50 years is going to be the biggest problem as it's completely and utterly unsolvable.
     
    Last edited by smf, May 15, 2019
  16. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    That video says Sweden is a democratic socialist state. It has fun animations but if you claim the EU allows socialism while requiring to privatize railway transport you’re not really qualified to talk abou anything EU. They should stick to animations
     
    Last edited by supersonicwaffle, May 16, 2019
  17. smf

    smf GBAtemp Psycho!

    Member
    9
    Feb 23, 2009
    United Kingdom
    What I find strange is that we're constantly being scared against voting for Labour because they'll nationalise everything & that does seem to be working.

    So that means if we actually do leave the EU then we'll be stuck with conservatives forever?

    I very much hope that is not the case.

    Not that privatization of the railways in the UK has gone particularly well, but we did that for the money and the failure of it seems more down to us than the EU.
     
    Last edited by smf, May 15, 2019
  18. notimp

    notimp GBAtemp Addict

    Member
    10
    Sep 18, 2007
    Have to catch up on reading everything posted already, but as I go - comment on failures of the EU. Now there is something I have to add to. ;)

    Well - lets see... getting fucked by the americans, every step of the way. Not having a political myth thats worth jack. Together with a bunch of yay saying technocrats - half of them not knowing what the heck they are doing. Blatant political corruption (or whatever the step before that is.. ;) ) no idea, where the ship is going - entirely out of touch. Still trying to sell a myth of free movement and liberal thought - that doest do jack for anyone that wasnt part of a student exchange program. ;)

    Now the good part. Technocrats in a liaison with big business. Thats the other half. So they know what they are doing. (Apart from currently only building industries that loose market share. ;) )

    In regards to further (deeper, not wider) integration, we still need to see the proposals. The first group of public german political thinkers on that front turned out to be moronic fraudsters (faked quotes and - coming up with ideas that sounded all kinds of dumb.. ;) ), at least they are out of the media for a while (upcoming elections), so that feels ok. ;) Germany isnt biting to what france was offering. Everyone else is slowly retracting. Harmonious we only are on one front. You want to harm us financially - well guess what. Suddenly we've found our commonalities.. ;)

    (The difference here is that britain can play free agent with their former five eyes relations. And freaking hurt us. Others - cant.)

    I'm still kind of chewing on the fact, that the US simply could export their financial crisis to our institutions. Which scream "satelite states" to me. But thats just a feeling that I cant get over.. ;) Nothing you should take to seriously - or necessarily look into... I'm not sure I could rationalize it to the end.. ;) But then I think about that we were sold on the EU with the image of prosperity and wealth, and just went through year 12 of wage decline for lower and lower medium classes folks.


    Britain voting Farage: Thats actually proper. Now - understand, that you are leaving - then leaving a present like Farage on the EU parlaments footstep on your way out is just the way to go. ;) Cowboy, gung-ho - raise the stakes... For arguing - I'm not sure if it will benefit you currently (I think most people understand what this means) but for morals, its freaking great. :) European media titles are "one third voted for him, two thirds voted against him" on it - which means there is still the "we have to somehow live with them as partners down the road" mindset upfront and center.
     
    Last edited by notimp, May 15, 2019
  19. smf

    smf GBAtemp Psycho!

    Member
    9
    Feb 23, 2009
    United Kingdom
    Yeah, like trolling or mobbing. The worst kind of people will vote Farage.
     
  20. supersonicwaffle

    supersonicwaffle GBAtemp Regular

    Member
    4
    Oct 15, 2018
    Germany
    Privatization of railways in Germany has gone absolutely horrible and it’s still a 100% state owned corporation, its logistics division makes a lot of money but everything transport has gone to shit.
     
    Last edited by supersonicwaffle, May 15, 2019
Quick Reply
Draft saved Draft deleted
Loading...