New UK Referendum Would Flip 'Brexit' Result of a Decade Ago, Poll Finds (independent.co.uk) 178
It's the 10-year anniversary of Britain's "Brexit" vote withdrawing from the European Union.
But a new UK poll "shows that a new Brexit referendum would reverse the vote that led to Britain's departure," reports Bloomberg:
Fifty-two percent of Britons think the UK should rejoin the EU, according to an Ipsos survey of 1,137 British adults conducted between May 14 and May 20. That's the inverse of the mood in June 2016 when a comparable share of the electorate backed Brexit...
Younger voters overwhelmingly favor reversing Brexit, whereas half of those ages 55 and above oppose returning to the bloc.
"The number of people who say Brexit is going worse than they had predicted has almost doubled in the past five years," reports The Independent, " from 27% in 2021 to 48% today — more than those saying it was going as well as or better than expected." [T]here is more backing for a second referendum, with 48 per cent now saying they would support one, against 27 per cent who would oppose it. Even a fifth of Reform UK voters and a quarter of those who voted Leave in 2016 would back a second vote, the study found.
Tufts University discussed the last 10 years with the European Studies chair at their international relations graduate school: Q: Have their fears of negative financial effects been realized?
A: The figures are quite revealing: The British GDP has been reduced by 6-8%, business investment has been reduced by 12%, and trade volume has been reduced by 15%, compared to what it could have been if the U.K. had remained in the EU...
Q: What do you think happens next?
A: The United Kingdom made a choice and they might have the opportunity, at some point, to revise this choice. I hope that when they have to decide again, they will be much more informed.
"The number of people who say Brexit is going worse than they had predicted has almost doubled in the past five years," reports The Independent, " from 27% in 2021 to 48% today — more than those saying it was going as well as or better than expected." [T]here is more backing for a second referendum, with 48 per cent now saying they would support one, against 27 per cent who would oppose it. Even a fifth of Reform UK voters and a quarter of those who voted Leave in 2016 would back a second vote, the study found.
Tufts University discussed the last 10 years with the European Studies chair at their international relations graduate school: Q: Have their fears of negative financial effects been realized?
A: The figures are quite revealing: The British GDP has been reduced by 6-8%, business investment has been reduced by 12%, and trade volume has been reduced by 15%, compared to what it could have been if the U.K. had remained in the EU...
Q: What do you think happens next?
A: The United Kingdom made a choice and they might have the opportunity, at some point, to revise this choice. I hope that when they have to decide again, they will be much more informed.
Flipping an effective tie (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, that will settle the argument once and for all.
Re: (Score:3)
Haven't looked at this poll result specifically, but the general trend atm is ~50/35/15 rejoin/stay out/don't know.
Re:Flipping an effective tie (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what made the entire situation so absurd. Worst of all it was a non-binding referendum. You don't take drastic measures on a simple majority like that. Most sane countries act on referendums only when there's a clear significant majority, as well as at least a simple majority in every state.
The UK should really be commended for their incredible display of political incompetence.
Re: Flipping an effective tie (Score:2)
You do if you said you d said beforehand you d honour the result like cameron did.
Re: Flipping an effective tie (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Flipping an effective tie (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, for what is basically a Constitution level change, it should be a clear majority, at least 60% if not higher. Results that are basically a tie mean that under slightly different circumstances such as different weather could well have resulted in the opposite result. Things that are easy to revert such as a referendum on getting rid of the time change (last referendum I voted in) can be simply 50%+1.
Re: (Score:2)
Fine, have another referendum, and if it holds, then by all means, rejoin the EU. Although in the "Yes, Minister" and "Yes, Prime Minister" TV series, Humphrey mentioned that the reason Britain got into the EU in the first place was to ensure that everybody was at each other's throats. Although this was in the 70s/80s
I do think it ironic that a poll would show a greater affinity for the EU, when in the most recent elections in Britain, SNP, Sinn Fein and Plaid Cymru all won victories. All parties that
Re: (Score:3)
If I ruled .. (Score:5, Interesting)
Sorry to all the nice and friendly people in the UK. But you need a few decades to try things that n your own. These things take time. Can't just hop off and on depending on the mood.
Re: (Score:3)
No idea why you'd want to say "you've got to stay out for 2 decades", but certainly "you've got to actually participate in the union if you want back in" is entirely reasonable, and I say that as a Brit.
Re:If I ruled .. (Score:5, Interesting)
No idea why you'd want to say "you've got to stay out for 2 decades", but certainly "you've got to actually participate in the union if you want back in" is entirely reasonable, and I say that as a Brit.
Disclaimer: I'm American, so I'm coming from an outsider's perspective. For the record, I was opposed to Brexit.
The reason the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach is that you don't want asshole counties like Hungary (in the Viktor Orbán days) or the current leadership of Slovakia threatening to leave and/or cause havoc unless you buy them off. My personal opinion is that the UK should never be allowed back in to show that once you leave, you leave forever. I would make an exception for North Ireland in that if they choose to reunite with the Republic of Ireland, they should definitely be allowed to be part of the EU as part of the Republic of Ireland.
Re:If I ruled .. (Score:5, Insightful)
Meh, taking petty revenge doesn't make sense from a diplomatic stand point. The fact is that both the UK, and the EU have a lot to gain by trading with each other, and sharing regulations. Refusing to do that is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Dealing with countries like Orban's Hungary is easily doable by taking a much more nuanced approach than "once you leave you're done".
For example, the UK would hopefully learn its lesson about leaving because before they left, they had a privileged position, with vetos, and the ability to opt out of implementing certain regulation, and not being part of schengen, and opting out of the €uro, and ... By leaving and rejoining (if it ever happens) they will (presumably) lose all of those benefits. If they were to do it again, and prove themselves to be abusing the mechanism, I'm sure the penalties would become much more harsh, and people would become much more reticent to let them back in.
Long story short - most diplomacy works best by taking a nuanced, and in general, forgiving approach, not by blunty applying rules like "if you leave you never get back in".
Of course... I might be biased in all these. I'm a Scot who voted to stay in (like most Scots by a wide margin). I of course very much want it to be possible for us to rejoin.
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit... I just noticed...
"€, 'blah' £, $!"
Did slashdot finally fix the stupid text encoding bug?
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit... I just noticed...
"€, 'blah' £, $!"
Did slashdot finally fix the stupid text encoding bug?
There was always a select list of reasonable symbols that were allowed for.
Re: (Score:3)
Meh, taking petty revenge doesn't make sense from a diplomatic stand point. The fact is that both the UK, and the EU have a lot to gain by trading with each other, and sharing regulations. Refusing to do that is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
If they were to do it again, and prove themselves to be abusing the mechanism, I'm sure the penalties would become much more harsh, and people would become much more reticent to let them back in.
The main reason for making rejoining the EU hard isn't a matter of revenge but practicality. Should a member be allowed to leave and then rejoin and then leave and then rejoin with no penalty? That would seem to be a really bad way to structure a union, a contract, or a business relationship.
If they were to do it again, and prove themselves to be abusing the mechanism, I'm sure the penalties would become much more harsh, and people would become much more reticent to let them back in.
What's the difference among invoking the harsh penalties after the first time or the second time or the third time? Doing it after the second time seems just as arbitrary as after the first time.
Re: (Score:2)
You said what the difference is yourself. Leave, rejoin, leave rejoin, leave rejoin causes chaos and churn. Leave, rejoin can be a populace being tricked by right wing elements into making a dumb decision, and it's very unlikely that a country that's done that is going to re-leave after discovering how badly it turned out for them. Do you really think the UK would be likely to leave again any time in the next 50 years if they rejoined now, having discovered just how wrong the tories were, and just how ri
Re: (Score:2)
It would be a huge coup if we came back.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
The EU could separate membership of the trade union from membership of the political union. You first join the outer circle, then the inner circle (or not). It is called the Europe with two speeds, or the European Onion.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach is that you don't want asshole counties like Hungary (in the Viktor Orbán days) or the current leadership of Slovakia threatening to leave and/or cause havoc unless you buy them off.
That's not a credible scenario or risk. On thing that Brexit has shown the world is that it was a stupid fucking idea. Before 2016 there was endless talk of who would leave the EU. Nexit, Frexit, Hunexit, all were terms thrown around, and then after Brexit happened they all went instantly silent. All the right wing anti-EU nationalist political parties effectively scrapped the idea due to what a disaster it was, and support for the idea of leaving the EU plummeted in every country.
The threat is non-existent
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately the EU has become a lot more than a trading coalition, that was the whole damn problem. No one had an issue with the EEC, then Mastricht happened which was a federalists wet dream. The EU is fundamentally undemocratic with the unelected commission making the rules and laws which the elected parliament get a yes no vote on. That's not democracy.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:3)
Others have already addressed your second point (which I partially agree with) below, let's look at your first point:
Unfortunately the EU has become a lot more than a trading coalition, that was the whole damn problem. No one had an issue with the EEC, then Mastricht happened which was a federalists wet dream.
Not sure what a federalist wet dream is in your mind, but I'll say this: before the EU, Europe was always at war. Since then, not a single war between EU members. And it's a safe bet that Russia would be a lot more aggressive and expansionist if there wasn't a political Union. Trade was enough to deter war for some time, but it isn't any more. The EU tried to develop a trade-based relationshi
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
Yes.
They don't get y make laws, only to vote on them.
And the.whole executive.branch is the Commission, anf they're not voted into power.
Re: (Score:2)
the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach
No, because that way you give way too much power to a bunch of manipulating and manipulated idiots making a decision at a particular point in time.
Re: (Score:2)
No idea why you'd want to say "you've got to stay out for 2 decades", but certainly "you've got to actually participate in the union if you want back in" is entirely reasonable, and I say that as a Brit.
Disclaimer: I'm American, so I'm coming from an outsider's perspective. For the record, I was opposed to Brexit. The reason the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach is that you don't want asshole counties like Hungary (in the Viktor Orbán days) or the current leadership of Slovakia threatening to leave and/or cause havoc unless you buy them off.
The thing people are arguing for is an endless number of Mulligans. Like Brexit every other year, then rejoining in the off years.
Gotta be some limit, and after all, GB went hard Brexit, so they would need to make a really good case to get back in. Something along the lines of "we FAFO'd"
Re: (Score:3)
I think what happened to the UK, socially and economically, should be enough to deter anyone else from making the same mistake.
We are about to find out if I'm right, as Switzerland votes on a population cap that would screw up their relationship with the EU. They are not in the EU, but they have adopted some of it, like freedom of movement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Freedom of movement [europa.eu]" in the context of the EU doesn't mean open borders. It's really freedom of residence provided that you get a job, or are a student or retired.
Re: (Score:3)
We tried a kamikaze Brexit, it didn't work. Let's hard a Hard Remain instead. Shengen, metric, the Euro, all of it.
It worked out really well for Ireland, it could do for us too.
Re: (Score:3)
The official independent stats from the government, provided by the Office for Budget Responsibility, say that the UK is at least 4% worse off (in terms of GDP) than it otherwise would have been. Maybe 8% worse off.
While there have been a few economic indicators in the UK that performed okay against the rest of the EU at one time or another, the EU is made up of 27 member states, some of which are still coming up to Western European levels, and of course many of those indicators only really show that the ve
Re: (Score:2)
The other part of the conversation is settling the question - is bigger better, or smaller better? In other words, would Britain be better off as a part of a larger entity, such as the EU? Or, as election results this month indicated, would it be better off as broken up into smaller countries - England, Scotland and Wales (and let Northern Ireland reunite w/ the rest of Ireland)?
Those who supported Brexit should be open to the next step - the devolution of powers to governments in Cardiff, Edinburgh and
Re: (Score:3)
If I ruled the EU, anyone leaving the EU must stay out for at least two decades. After that, the UK is welcome back but they must fit in.
Well it's been almost a decade since we invoked article 50
Euro as currency.
Works for me.
Metric system.
We're mostly metric now. Exceptions being miles on roads, pints in the pub and how people talk. You can't legislate the latter. It would personally suck for me to go to kms because I learned miles at a formative age and it's hard to reprogram one's brain. They are a litt
Re: (Score:3)
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
When you're done you'll need to head over to Malta and cyprus too.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
What do you mean the Greek nod yes when they mean no?
Re:If I ruled .. (Score:4, Interesting)
Our former colonies have all made the metric switch just fine. Canada's a bit confused because the building industry tends to be Imperial (or the US equivalents), but otherwise they're switched fine. As a Briton who emigrated to Canada as an adult and married an Aussie, before returning to the UK, I can attest to the fact that you can adjust. I don't do anything in miles anymore, even though I've been back in the UK almost 20 years. For a while I did low temperatures in celsius (I'd lived in Canada) and high temperatures in Farenheit (I'd live on a RAF base in Cyprus in the early 80s and later in the US in my 20s), but then I lived in Melbourne and experienced high temperatures and metric at the same time. It comes down to experiences.
Pints are defined in mls! Please don't go metric in the Aussie way: their beers are tiny ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Please don't go metric in the Aussie way: their beers are tiny ;)
Traditionally that's because the weather is so bloody hot. A big glass of beer gets warm before you can finish it. If you travel up the east coast of Australia it is especially clear. Starting in the south in Victoria, they drink (UK) pints. In NSW they drink the "schooner" which is about 425mL, then up north in the tropics of Queensland they drink half-pints or "middies" which are IIRC 10 oz.
Of course, this is just a generalization and you can find a pub in any state trying to be clever or quirky and diffe
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
They already drove cars with the steering wheel on the left plus sweden had 1/10th population of the uk and traffic has increased somewhat since the 60s and the infrastructure costs would be in the 10s of billions.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
And let me tell you I get super pissy with the barman if he gives me 568.260.
The stingy bastard.
Re: (Score:2)
A pint in a pub is "metric".
Nearly all Irish / British pubs in Germany sell pints. Either fake pints with 500ml content, but they write "pint" as headline over the drinks, or: real pints. 620ml.
Even the French sell "pints." Last time I was there I thought I was doing the right thing, ordering a "demi-litre" but the bar staff kept correcting me by saying "pint." I'm pretty sure they were 500mL glasses though.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't necessarily disagree (except maybe the side of road thing, it's far too late for any country to do that and it's a minor inconvenience.)
I would add another requirement: any referendum to join must have a supermajority. AND a supermajority must approve of any subsequent attempt to leave. Frankly Brexit should have had a supermajority to begin with - it was a major constitutional change, you don't do constitutional changes when the country is pretty much split 50/50, with a tiny majority in favor of o
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
I don't necessarily disagree (except maybe the side of road thing, it's far too late for any country to do that and it's a minor inconvenience.)
Ah finally someone who understands the language of diplomacy. I promote you to prime minister. See people? It is not that hard.
Re: (Score:2)
But Ireland, Malta and Cyprus can continue driving on the on the left? Would the province of Northern Ireland be given a special exemption? Seems fair given that it's already got half a foot in the EU already due to Boris's Brexit deal that sold them out and undermined British sovereignty with a line down through the Irish Sea. Or would you force a switch of sides when crossing the border? That would all seem to undermine the Good Friday Agreement though.
Two decades seems a bit arbritary, maybe even spi
Re: (Score:2)
I think that is a bit crass. I would advocate that we let them back in, at the same conditions everybody gets, but they do not get any votes for the first 10 years.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
You forgot a crucial element: after at least twenty years passed, they then have to re-apply from scratch.
Re: (Score:2)
...but you don't.
The current rules are that the UK could apply to join the EU. The UK would have to go thru the entire qualification process like any other nation applying to join the EU. It would be an excellent lesson in FAFO.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
I The UK had all required metric systems adopted. That included showing 0.5L markers on pint glasses. There's no requirement for a country to be metric in the EU, there's only a requirement to trade in metric which they were very much doing. Also there's no requirement to drive on the right as condition of being a member of the EU. It's also completely insignificant in a way that has no impact on trade or people.
What part of "if I ruled the EU" did you not get? Guards! Lock him up.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
Half of the nice people who voted for BREXIT will be dead then. Half of the nice people who would vote next year to R-EU-JOIN, will be 40 when they could join again. Your idea makes no sense at all ... unless you aim to keep them out forever.
Then: EU and EURO are two different things, and rightful so.
You people of the internets are not the brightest are you? I rule the EU. Your opinion is just that. One of millions. I do not need to explain my rulings to you peasant! Guaaaaaards!
What do you mean the prison is full? Toss him in the sea.
Racism. (Score:5, Interesting)
The entire original argument for Brexit was based on racist nationalism.
They wanted to kick the foreigners out (while still letting their own elite vacation in Europe).
They claimed that the UK could get better treaties than the Europeans did. (because the UK politicians were 'superior' to the Europeans)
They claimed that they could reduce regulations because those darn foreigners were making stupid regulations (they weren't).
They were tired of those foreigners telling them what to do (national sovereignty).
The truth is:
Foreigners do not go places unless they can get jobs, which increases your economy. They are cheap labor for you to exploit, not a drain on your economy.
The larger your country/organization is, the better treaties you can negotiate.
Regulations exist because either they help your people or they help your existing corporations. Otherwise they go away.
Having foreigners telling you what to do is well worth it if YOU can also tell the foreigners what to do. Uniformity of rules makes everything easier. It is only a problem if they do not let you help make the rules.
Re: (Score:3)
This is true. The "legitimate concerns" are legitimate, e.g. availability of housing, but they are targeting the wrong people. It's the billionaire fucks who told them to commit brexicide that are causing the problems, not immigrants.
The worst part is that even after it was revealed that Farage got 5 million quid for delivering Brexit, these muppets don't seem to have realized that it's just more evidence he isn't working in their interests. He's working for the billionaires who have made him fabulously wea
Re: (Score:2)
The worst part is that even after it was revealed that Farage got 5 million quid for delivering Brexit
the collective amnesia about boris is remarkable ... is that a british thing?
and i don't mind the uk now br-entering the eu at all but it's no less comical. that wreck will have sunk by then anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
The entire original argument for Brexit was based on racist nationalism.
They wanted to kick the foreigners out (while still letting their own elite vacation in Europe).
Humans are tribal, in modern times that tribe is usually their nation, and they care deeply about the survival of their tribe.
If immigration is seen as changing the fundamental nature of that tribe (nation) people will resist it.
We need to figure out a way to deal with that fact if we want to continue to have relatively open borders.
Re:News for nerds? (Score:5, Interesting)
Lol racism had nothing to do with it
Living in the UK myself, people stopped caring about race from Gen X onwards
Are you actually living in the UK? Or hiding in your basement int he UK and never leaving your house. Let me guess, you're a white male.
Racism is fucking rampant in the UK. Has been for a long time. You pretending it doesn't exist or pretending it wasn't a deciding factor for some people is just ignorant. Go and explore your own country and get out of the house a bit. Ideally go with a black or Indian friend (you have those right?), or someone named Ahmed. Maybe after witnessing what it's like first hand you'll get a clue.
Sidenote: My favourite racist anecdote is walking with a work colleague (born to two Indian parents). It was the day after Brexit and someone shouted at him in the street, "Finally now that we have Brexit we can get rid of you people." To which the reply came: "I was born in Chelsea, and India isn't even part of the EU you dumb cunt." My favourite things about racists is the expression on their faces when their only braincell is forced to do some processing. It's like a human equivalent of the little spinney icon.
Nooooo, well, okaysure. (Score:2)
So why the hell not undo all of that and go back to a unified regulatory system? I didn't really have any plans for *checks 'to do' list* the next 10 years
Fun Fact: The initial MDR deadline was 12/2020 and does anyone remember what happened in 2020!?
Re: Nooooo, well, okaysure. (Score:3)
Polls don't vote (Score:2)
The UK adopted all the shitty tricks that America did, their ruling class was all over Epstein Island too after all.
So I can't imagine they don't just use the same tricks to make sure people can't vote when they're not supposed to. Maybe it was just a l
Re: (Score:2)
The UK mostly doesn't do voter suppression. However, they did for the Referendum. Basically, anyone who might not be racist was not permitted to vote.
Even then, 48% still insisted on staying in the EU.
One of the reasons the UK doesn't do voter suppression the way the US does is because (until very recently) the House of Lords had a lot of people in it who owed no favours at all to the political elite but did have a huge responsibility to making sure that things functioned in the long term. This has since be
Re: Polls don't vote (Score:2)
I don't know about the United Kingdomâ¦
Then let me teach you a British saying: wind your neck in.
Won't happen. (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes the British public may now be in favour of rejoining but it's only because they're still deluding themselves into thinking the European Union will let them rejoin on the same terms they left on, i.e. with exemptions from giving up the Pound and adopting the Euro or joining the passport-free Schengen Area. That's not on the table and it never will be. The United Kingdom had the best possible deal with the EU but wanted more. They played a game of chicken with the referendum but screwed themselves when it went 52/48 in favour of leaving when everyone expected to be the other way around.
Then of course there's the issue of democracy. Any time any further referendum on this is proposed you're told "we already voted on this" and "you're just trying to thwart democracy". The powerful forces who wanted the UK out of the EU got the result they wanted by promising the left behind communities a bevy of treasures if they just voted leave and now they have not only will they not get those treasures but they will never be consulted again. We had democracy once and that's enough.
Re: (Score:2)
As usual the old people are wrong because if it's one thing old people are good at it's being wrong. The purpose of the
Re:Won't happen. (Score:4, Interesting)
Nobody in the UK thinks they're going to get the sweetheart deal.
Do you really believe that? Seriously? Given the intelligence of the average voter? I actually live in Stoke-on-Trent, the famed Brexit capital of Britain, and trust me there are plenty of people who genuinely think the EU is bluffing and we can just bully them into making an exception for us. After all, we're special! They'll do it for us! It's the same mentality that got us in to that game of chicken I mentioned. We Brits have a very unhealthy and unrealistic attitude towards the rest of Europe and I think rejoining is a pipe dream until that changes which will not happen any time soon.
Re: (Score:3)
They played a game of chicken with the referendum
They didn't. There was nothing wrong with having a referendum. The referendum was advisory and not legally binding in any way. What they did, was make some insanely fucking stupid decisions based on the outcome of a referendum that showed no clear support for undertaking such a monumental national change.
In sane countries referendums which are non-binding with these results wouldn't be acted on.
In sane countries referendums which are binding would require both a significant majority (66% or 75% support) as
Re: (Score:2)
We won't get the old deal back, but I see that as a benefit. As for the Euro, I'd join but the reality is that the requirement to join is not at all enforced. If a country does nothing to actually adopt it, nothing happens. Several other countries haven't bothered.
Made up numbers (Score:4, Insightful)
I too can make up numbers about an economy regarding what might have happened if something that happened didn't happen. Pretty hard to tell me I'm wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it would be easy to tell you you're wrong if you make up numbers. Economic analysis is a thing that happens, and you can trend the effect of changes in trading policies between countries in relation to those countries trading with others to determine the economic impact of your policies.
You not understanding something doesn't make it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
If someone pretending to be a scientist tells you a number like this and can´t tell you the error, they are a social scientist pushing bullshit.
Yeah, no shit. (Score:4, Informative)
Brexit happened on lies upon bloody lies by populist douchebags like Nigel Farage. The British people were once again screwed over epic style by the political class. Which made things even worse after Brexit, ironically.
We all knew Brexit would hurt, but holy cow, as much as we like to make fun of the Brits for doing Brexit, this is painful to watch. We feel you guys.
Re: (Score:2)
It was a hijacking, rather than the political "class." Unless you're going to call Rupert Murdock a politician it most definitely wasn't the politicians running the show.
coulda (Score:2)
"compared to what it could have been if the U.K. had remained in the EU"
Could. If only pigs could fly.
Many young and foolish realise they made a mistake (Score:3)
Re: Many young and foolish realise they made a mis (Score:3)
These people live among us.
Re: (Score:2)
These people are actually a large group of the population. Cretins that understand nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
There was an episode of Question Time (a QA session with politicians and the public), and a woman said, on national TV, that she voted for Brexit because of bendy bananas.
Bendy bananas is one of the oldest, most frequently debunked myths about the EU. The claim is there is a crazy EU law that costs retailers money, regulating the curvature of bananas. There are actually rules about bananas... But they were written by the UK. They became a de facto standard, and the EU adopted them FROM US.
The level of ignor
Re: (Score:2)
I hope these repulsive idiots suffer. Maybe some of them will learn that decisions have consequences. Although probably most will not.
Have your cake it and eat it too? (Score:5, Interesting)
Dig just a little deeper, and the full story flips the article. British support for reverting Brexit drops sharply into negative territory if that specifically means losing out on its previous carve-outs like keeping the pound, keeping border controls, and keeping immigration controls. For example, yougov then puts rejoin support at around 36%, with opposition at 45%. But the majority of polled EU folks oppose such carve outs for Britons.
See https://yougov.com/en-gb/artic... [yougov.com]
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't surprising, but I know what the best offer they're likely to get is.
On the other hand... (Score:2)
48% still think it was a good decision. With a population this abysmally stupid, a country has no future.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing happens next (Score:2)
Nobody cares (Score:4, Interesting)
Not in the EU at least, they can change their mind as often as they want, but as they themselves said many, many times:
Brexit means Brexit.
As long as there's a veto, they won't become a member again.
First, because SOMEBODY would veto their ass and second.
NOBODY will ever want a UK member with a veto.
We learned our lesson.
Also, the EU that the UK left is not the EU from today, the EU finalized tons of regulations and rulings that the UK had been blocking for DECADES.
Good riddance!
Of course (Score:2)
Europe does not want them back (Score:2)
I doubt Europe would want the UK back with everything that is going on, with the current state of the UK and the mass enrichment and mass surveillance and all the violence and all the many other issues.
UK made their bed, let them sleep in it now, and be a glaring warning to the rest of Europe.
In a decade or two we can see what is left and if it is worth taking back.
Decline (Score:2)
UK has been in decline, with overpopulation and underinvestment and corruption since the 1950s.
We were told that joining the EU would save us, but the decline continued, then we were told that Brexit would save us, but the decline continued. Now idiots are saying rejoining EU will save us.
Re: Decline (Score:2)
The UK suffered after the dot-com bust and to compensate they borrowed and borrowed. Suffered heavily from the 2008 financial crisis and it borrowed and borrowed some more...
Maybe the problem was with those that were pushing solutions that did not treat the problem?
The UK today has such severe problems that even a Labour government is forced to take austerity measures.
There's a lot of pomp, arrogance and bravado amongst so
Re: Decline (Score:2)
I didn't forget, I lived through it. It didn't flourish.
The EU and the three-card monte (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Although there is a right join, no far right join has ever been defined and there's no signs that it would in fact be possible.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Except the USA must reform the following laws before that happens:
1. Eliminate binding arbitration in consumer contracts.
2. Eliminate Employment-at-Will and replace it with Just Cause.
3. Eliminate noncompete agreeements in employment contracts.
4. Move to a single-payer health care system
5. Implement a 48 hour maximum working time for non-mangerial employees.
6. Eliminate taxation of Expats if they are outside of the United States
7. Implement "Trading Standards" in a similar fashion that the UK does.
8. Implem
Re: (Score:2)
You're picking nits on an imaginary solution for a mostly imaginary, dare I say fake, problem. Even if they're large and interesting nits.
So my imaginary solution approach to the dimensional collapse on the profit dimension would be a progressive profits tax related to market share. Main area of overlap with your ideas is probably the third one, where one of the ways to detect monopoly status is the lack of freedom of employees to switch to a competing company.
Re:UK (Score:5, Interesting)
America and the UK have very little in common even if they often think otherwise. Look, for example, at the overwhelming support for state run healthcare, and consumer rights, with pro-active enforcement, etc. Culturally they're not close either. Despite language differences, the UK is much closer to most European countries in culture, attitude towards government, and so on.
Re:UK (Score:5, Funny)
Re:UK (Score:5, Funny)
We have a deal, a fantastic deal, and I am sure the UK is definitely going to sign it this weekend, no more discussions but a great deal, this weekend. For sure.
It's a beautiful deal, I mean everyone is talking how perfect it is, and only I can broker perfect deals.. But lets talking about old Slee[py Joe, he's teh one who rigged The great country of Britain's did I tell you how much I lobe Britain, And they love me oh so much, but Everyone loves me - I love inflation and will arrest Hillary Clinton - who received no votes in 2016, and I'm naming all the buildings in Washington DC after me because everyone loves me, I'm the best president, love love love. Time for a nap....
Re: (Score:2)
Jees what. Excellent troll. Nightmare idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me you have absolutely no clue about politics and history without telling me.
Seriously, with a mind this dim, how do you manage to tie your shoelaces?
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody in the EU wants these assholes back at their old conditions. They will probably habe to accept conditions worse than usual.
Re: (Score:2)
Nowadays there is no cherry-picking rules for new members. The Euro and Schengen are mandatory. And a lot of other stuff too.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. It would still be a massive advantage for the UK to get back in.
Re: (Score:2)
Forcing the UK to join Schengen would either force Ireland to join it too or create problems with the Good Friday agreement. Maybe the current "border in the Irish Sea" would be adapted, but it's not unthinkable that an exception would be made. The EU is quite pragmatic when it needs to be.