• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

Status
Not open for further replies.

burneside

Member
Joined
12 Sep 2011
Messages
231
Location
Isle of Dogs, London
If I understand correctly, you don't like it, even though there has been no direct harm to you and you can't even name the treaties that you don't like. That was enough for you to support an action that will cost many people their jobs and undermine the economic stability of the country?

I suppose Maastricht and Lisbon could be named as two of the most notable offenders. As for the rest of your post, that is your opinion, other opinions are available.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Enthusiast

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,045
If I understand correctly, you don't like it, even though there has been no direct harm to you and you can't even name the treaties that you don't like. That was enough for you to support an action that will cost many people their jobs and undermine the economic stability of the country?
My antipathy towards the EU began in earnest in 1992 when that nice Mr Major signed the Maastricht Treaty. That treaty ended all pretence that the EEC (as it then was) was merely a trading treaty and it paved the way for political union. The process was all but completed by the Lisbon Treaty which identified the bloc as the European Union and bestowed on it a constitutional identity. That Treaty makes great play of the democratic competency of the Union and it is clear that its aim is to reduce the areas where individual nations have control. You don't have to be effected personally by any individual facility afforded by our membership. The fact that successive governments have seen fit to abrogate their responsibilities to a foreign unelected cabal is disturbing enough to want to see it ended. There are many ways in which this arrangement has affected me (not necessarily harmed), most of them trivial it has to be said. But that isn't the issue. I don't like the idea of matters being outside of the control of a government which the electorate has the chance to dismiss at regular intervals. It was quite clear from the result of the referendum that large numbers of people were dissatisfied with this country being a member. All had their own reasons, none less valid than any other.

It's most unlikely that Brexit will cost many people their jobs or undermine economic stability. In fact, if the last three years is anything to go by, the reverse may well be true. There will be a realignment of the economy in the coming years that will see it veer away from the emphasis on trade with a declining, over-regulated, protectionist Europe and instead move towards that with the wider world (where most of the growth is likely to be seen). The UK will survive and thrive despite the naysayers' best efforts.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
It's most unlikely that Brexit will cost many people their jobs or undermine economic stability. In fact, if the last three years is anything to go by, the reverse may well be true. There will be a realignment of the economy in the coming years that will see it veer away from the emphasis on trade with a declining, over-regulated, protectionist Europe and instead move towards that with the wider world (where most of the growth is likely to be seen). The UK will survive and thrive despite the naysayers' best efforts.
What do you think the wider world will want to buy from Britain that they can't buy already under existing trade arrangements, or buy better/cheaper from somewhere more local?
 

Puffing Devil

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2013
Messages
2,742
My antipathy towards the EU began in earnest in 1992 when that nice Mr Major signed the Maastricht Treaty. That treaty ended all pretence that the EEC (as it then was) was merely a trading treaty and it paved the way for political union. The process was all but completed by the Lisbon Treaty which identified the bloc as the European Union and bestowed on it a constitutional identity. That Treaty makes great play of the democratic competency of the Union and it is clear that its aim is to reduce the areas where individual nations have control. You don't have to be effected personally by any individual facility afforded by our membership. The fact that successive governments have seen fit to abrogate their responsibilities to a foreign unelected cabal is disturbing enough to want to see it ended. There are many ways in which this arrangement has affected me (not necessarily harmed), most of them trivial it has to be said. But that isn't the issue. I don't like the idea of matters being outside of the control of a government which the electorate has the chance to dismiss at regular intervals. It was quite clear from the result of the referendum that large numbers of people were dissatisfied with this country being a member. All had their own reasons, none less valid than any other.

That whole paragraph is meaningless waffle with no substance - we've heard it all before. Where's the actual, physical, demonstrable harm to you of being in the EU? Would be the ability to travel without visa or delay to many countries, use your phone without roaming charges while you're there and claim compensation if your flight is delayed on the return?

It's most unlikely that Brexit will cost many people their jobs or undermine economic stability. In fact, if the last three years is anything to go by, the reverse may well be true. There will be a realignment of the economy in the coming years that will see it veer away from the emphasis on trade with a declining, over-regulated, protectionist Europe and instead move towards that with the wider world (where most of the growth is likely to be seen). The UK will survive and thrive despite the naysayers' best efforts.

Plot twist - we've not left yet.

My company is relocating an EU sales hub to the, err, EU. Jobs leaving the country.

In other news, our economy is 80% services, 90% in London. The majority of those in London are financial services which rely on access to the European markets. Please explain to me why the UK should have unfettered access to those markets after Brexit?
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
Are we still expecting Leave voters to answer these sorts of questions? Gut instinct and national identity were primary drivers for those to vote to leave the EU. Tangible, personally-affecting reasons were - still are - hard to come by.

Waving actual proof of social or economic harm in the faces of Leave voters makes little difference. The deed is done and we all have to live with the resulting mess.
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
I would refer you to Enthusiast's latest post above, they very eloquently describe my feelings to a T. I don't think there is anything more I could add. And the good news tonight is that the Lords have caved in and passed the Brexit bill.
So we are handing control over to Boris Johnson instead of the EU. Sounds like a great plan. Our cup shall overfloweth. Ha ha. It's like Liverpool selling Fernando Torres and using the money to buy Andy Carroll. Alright it's not really but you get my meaning. Ha ha. Maybe not.
 
Last edited:

Puffing Devil

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2013
Messages
2,742
I would refer you to Enthusiast's latest post above, they very eloquently describe my feelings to a T. I don't think there is anything more I could add. And the good news tonight is that the Lords have caved in and passed the Brexit bill.

You can't even answer the question yourself. Nothing concrete, no harm, yet you're out of the EU.

Are we still expecting Leave voters to answer these sorts of questions? Gut instinct and national identity were primary drivers for those to vote to leave the EU. Tangible, personally-affecting reasons were - still are - hard to come by.

Waving actual proof of social or economic harm in the faces of Leave voters makes little difference. The deed is done and we all have to live with the resulting mess.

As has been so ably shown by @burneside and @Enthusiast you are, unfortunately, correct.
 

burneside

Member
Joined
12 Sep 2011
Messages
231
Location
Isle of Dogs, London
You can't even answer the question yourself. Nothing concrete, no harm, yet you're out of the EU.



As has been so ably shown by @burneside and @Enthusiast you are, unfortunately, correct.

It's an ideological thing which you seem unable to grasp. I am resolutely against being part of a political entity called the United States of Europe, if the rest of Western Europe is happy with that so be it, but thankfully we will now go our own way.
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
It's an ideological thing which you seem unable to grasp. I am resolutely against being part of a political entity called the United States of Europe, if the rest of Western Europe is happy with that so be it, but thankfully we will now go our own way.
it doesn't actually exist though does it?
 

Enthusiast

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2019
Messages
1,045
Where's the actual, physical, demonstrable harm to you of being in the EU?

I didn't say there is any physical, demonstrable harm to me. That's not the reason I voted to leave.
Would be the ability to travel without visa or delay to many countries, use your phone without roaming charges while you're there and claim compensation if your flight is delayed on the return?

Incredible as it may seem, people travelled between the UK and mainland Europe before the EU was formed. They continue to travel between the UK and non-EU countries. It can be done. The other matters I'll leave to the UK government to negotiate. If they continue, fine, if not it's hardly the end of the world and the electorate will have the opportunity to dismiss those who fail to enact their wishes (a luxury they do not have with the EU).

Please explain to me why the UK should have unfettered access to those markets after Brexit?

There's no reason at all why it should. However, once again as incredible as it may seem, the UK conducts quite a large chunk of its financial business outside the EU, with the USA for example, where common sense agreements rather than political dogma prevail. One would like to hope that a similar philosophy would be present in the EU as they negotiate an agreement to see smooth trade and commerce between their remaining members and their nearest and arguably most important trading partner. But that, of course, cannot be guaranteed, particularly as they are so insistent that anything they agree to must not give the UK a competitive advantage. That's their call.

Being an EU member is a trade off between having the advantages of membership in exchange for sacrificing certain democratic control. I perfectly understand the Remainer viewpoint. EU membership does provide some undoubted advantages and the question for the electorate in June 2016 was do they prefer to hang on to those advantages and are willing to sacrifice the controls they have, via their Parliament, over many issues previously the Bailiwick of Westminster. Unfortunately, when Leavers make their views known they are generally dismissed as "meaningless waffle" (or similar). That's because the facilities provided by membership are known (for so along as the EU sees fit to retain them as they are) whilst those provided by non-membership are necessarily speculative. But as is now hopefully becoming clear, the question put to them was purely binary. There's no "half in, half out". The EU will, quite understandably, not countenance that and it should have been obvious when people voted that it was never a realistic option.

It seems the Bill has now passed its final hurdle and bar anything untoward happening (the SNP are rumbling about judicial reviews because they say, the Scottish Parliament has not given its agreement to our withdrawal) then we leave next week. Instead of carping on about how terrible it's all going to be, individuals and businesses would do better to get on and make whatever arrangements the have to in order to carry on. Nothing stays the same forever.
 

TrafficEng

Member
Joined
13 Nov 2019
Messages
419
Location
North of London
Waving actual proof of social or economic harm in the faces of Leave voters makes little difference. The deed is done and we all have to live with the resulting mess.

It all depends whether that "actual proof" is what it claims to be....

In other news, our economy is 80% services, 90% in London. The majority of those in London are financial services which rely on access to the European markets...

Does the financial services sector rely on the EU?

According to some estimates, a quarter of the financial services sector’s annual revenue comes from business related to the EU. The Institute for Fiscal Studies calculates that EU business is particularly important in banking and investment, with over 40% of UK exports in these areas heading to the continent. Many overseas banks have made the UK their European headquarters because of its access to the EU market.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/brexit-and-financial-services

...Please explain to me why the UK should have unfettered access to those markets after Brexit?

[continuation of same quote] But the relationship works both ways: London is the world’s leading financial centre, with no European alternative able to match it on efficiency and cost-effectiveness. PricewaterhouseCoopers emphasises that many European businesses rely on the UK to fulfil their financial requirements.

There is usually more than one way at looking at the same 'proof'. 25% & 40% are big percentages of London's revenues and their loss would be a blow. But not necessarily a fatal one.
 

Puffing Devil

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2013
Messages
2,742
I didn't say there is any physical, demonstrable harm to me. That's not the reason I voted to leave.

You voted for something that will make you feel better, that has no identifiable, tangible benefits and will make many people poorer and will impact your own quality of life?

Incredible as it may seem, people travelled between the UK and mainland Europe before the EU was formed. They continue to travel between the UK and non-EU countries. It can be done. The other matters I'll leave to the UK government to negotiate. If they continue, fine, if not it's hardly the end of the world and the electorate will have the opportunity to dismiss those who fail to enact their wishes (a luxury they do not have with the EU).

Yes, we will still travel. We cannot work there easily. People who do work in the EU will lose their jobs. Those jobs will not reappear in the UK.

There's no reason at all why it should. However, once again as incredible as it may seem, the UK conducts quite a large chunk of its financial business outside the EU, with the USA for example, where common sense agreements rather than political dogma prevail. One would like to hope that a similar philosophy would be present in the EU as they negotiate an agreement to see smooth trade and commerce between their remaining members and their nearest and arguably most important trading partner. But that, of course, cannot be guaranteed, particularly as they are so insistent that anything they agree to must not give the UK a competitive advantage. That's their call.

London is a financial centre with a critical mass - lose that mass and you lose your importance in the world markets. Perhaps you can tell us what you mean by "a large chunk of it's financial business outside the EU" Chunk is not a term I'm familiar with, what exactly do you mean? As for hope - hope is not a strategy - especially for an economy. We will be leaving a trading alliance - why on earth would that alliance give us any benefit that was not mutual?

Being an EU member is a trade off between having the advantages of membership in exchange for sacrificing certain democratic control. I perfectly understand the Remainer viewpoint. EU membership does provide some undoubted advantages and the question for the electorate in June 2016 was do they prefer to hang on to those advantages and are willing to sacrifice the controls they have, via their Parliament, over many issues previously the Bailiwick of Westminster. Unfortunately, when Leavers make their views known they are generally dismissed as "meaningless waffle" (or similar). That's because the facilities provided by membership are known (for so along as the EU sees fit to retain them as they are) whilst those provided by non-membership are necessarily speculative. But as is now hopefully becoming clear, the question put to them was purely binary. There's no "half in, half out". The EU will, quite understandably, not countenance that and it should have been obvious when people voted that it was never a realistic option.

Meaningless waffle is well-chosen - you have not mentioned any specifics. We seem to be back to hope again.

It seems the Bill has now passed its final hurdle and bar anything untoward happening (the SNP are rumbling about judicial reviews because they say, the Scottish Parliament has not given its agreement to our withdrawal) then we leave next week. Instead of carping on about how terrible it's all going to be, individuals and businesses would do better to get on and make whatever arrangements the have to in order to carry on. Nothing stays the same forever.

Many businesses are - they are moving their business out of the UK.
 

Puffing Devil

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2013
Messages
2,742
25% & 40% are big percentages of London's revenues and their loss would be a blow. But not necessarily a fatal one.

That must win the prize for the understatement of the year..... Don't worry, you'll lose a leg and an arm, but it's not fatal.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry that there is such flippancy about losing 40% of the City's revenue. That revenue drives the rest of London.
 

TrafficEng

Member
Joined
13 Nov 2019
Messages
419
Location
North of London
People who do work in the EU will lose their jobs.

Why is that? Have the EU said they must be fired?

I thought one of the mantras of modern economies was the need to import and attract highly-skilled people. It would seem an odd thing to do to get rid of UK employees working in the EU just because they have the wrong colour passport.

Perhaps these workers should claim political asylum and refuse to be sent back to the despotic UK?

London is a financial centre with a critical mass - lose that mass and you lose your importance in the world markets.

True. But the real threat comes from China and their growing FinServices sector. By the time Paris and Frankfurt have finished squabbling over who takes over from London, it may be that none of the European financial centres look that great.
 

TrafficEng

Member
Joined
13 Nov 2019
Messages
419
Location
North of London
That must win the prize for the understatement of the year..... Don't worry, you'll lose a leg and an arm, but it's not fatal.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry that there is such flippancy about losing 40% of the City's revenue. That revenue drives the rest of London.

You are making some assumptions:

a) That it will be lost
b) That it won't be replaced by something else
c) That it wasn't going to be lost anyway (See 'China' (and Frankfurt))
d) That it will happen overnight, rather than over a period of time that allows adjustment
e) That it is a good thing for the UK's economy to be so heavily reliant on a sector which is so mobile and vulnerable to external factors.
f) That the rest of the UK really cares that much about the London economy.

"This will sting, but it will make you better"

P.s. 25% not 40%.
 

Struner

Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
767
Location
Ommelanden, EU
That must win the prize for the understatement of the year..... Don't worry, you'll lose a leg and an arm, but it's not fatal.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry that there is such flippancy about losing 40% of the City's revenue. That revenue drives the rest of London.
This springs to mind:
 

burneside

Member
Joined
12 Sep 2011
Messages
231
Location
Isle of Dogs, London
it doesn't actually exist though does it?

It's well on the way with the Euro, national governments have to get annual budgets approved by Brussels which can be vetoed, as Greece knows only too well. And then of course there's the EU army, which we were told was "a dangerous fantasy", but will soon be a reality. What kind of trading bloc needs its own army?
 

BlueFox

Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
759
Location
Carlisle
And then of course there's the EU army, which we were told was "a dangerous fantasy", but will soon be a reality.

It will only happen if every country in the EU votes for it. So if we stay in we can stop it happening. If we leave we can't.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,036
Location
No longer here
Are we still expecting Leave voters to answer these sorts of questions? Gut instinct and national identity were primary drivers for those to vote to leave the EU. Tangible, personally-affecting reasons were - still are - hard to come by.

And that is fine. Gut instinct and ideas about national identity among other things are perfectly valid reasons to cast a vote, and each person's vote is as good as another's.

The relentless pursuit of "oh show me where YOU actually got affected in a MATERIAL way by the EU" is a redundant question. Wider issues like the concept of justice, community, and pride and personal concept of nationhood were important too. If Britain were suddenly to be administered as a colony of the USA tomorrow I could not sit here and claim that because the USA legislated for white self-employed people and were going to cut my tax bill that it was in any way a good or just idea.

It never enters some people's heads that other people might vote in a way which is not entirely self-centred. This is the most depressingly circular thread on the whole board and it's mostly the Remainer side with the poorest signal to noise ratio.
 

BlueFox

Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
759
Location
Carlisle
If we've left, why would we care? (save for the impact it might have on NATO)

It's the way it was used by leave campaigners as a reason why we should leave, as though we had no say on whether it happens or not. It was "look what they're forcing on us", when we'd be part of any decision, and could veto it. Same thing with Turkey joining the EU, and many other areas of the leave campaign.
 

Esker-pades

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2015
Messages
3,766
Location
Beds, Bucks, or somewhere else
It's most unlikely that Brexit will cost many people their jobs or undermine economic stability. In fact, if the last three years is anything to go by, the reverse may well be true. There will be a realignment of the economy in the coming years that will see it veer away from the emphasis on trade with a declining, over-regulated, protectionist Europe and instead move towards that with the wider world (where most of the growth is likely to be seen). The UK will survive and thrive despite the naysayers' best efforts.
Here's where I take issue. The rest has been dealt with by other posters', so I won't bother piling in.

I, and most other "naysayers'" honestly don't want the UK to suffer. I want the UK to do well after Brexit. We live here too, and will be affected by the consequences of Brexit. The reason we continue to say "this is a bad idea", is because we want our country to suffer. I would love to be re-convinced* that Brexit is a good idea. That would mean I could stop worrying. However, I'm not going to be re-convinced of that by nebulous fantasies about parliamentary sovereignty, or waffle about the awful things that the Maastricht Treaty allegedly did, or the fact that having 0 trade agreements where we currently have well over 100 will mean that we'll somehow be able to trade with more of the world.

*Yes, I was on the leave side until ~2017.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top