4 ms·

The UK move is interesting. On London, of course the do-well Londoners want to be a part of the EU system. They're doing well under it all. But what's done is d

The UK move is interesting. On London, of course the do-well Londoners want to be a part of the EU system. They're doing well under it all. But what's done is done. From what I can see, the real focus should have been, long ago, making sure ALL of Britain was doing well. Not just London. That ship has sailed and now the UK will have to come together and ensure mutual prosperity or risk further divide. On Scotland, it seems to me that Scotland already got their vote. I can't see the UK allowing another one. There may be a SNP staged vote, but it won't have any teeth without it coming from Downing St. So I'm dismissive of the Scottish indie idea at this point. It just didn't pan out. Anyone who wants that, needs to at minimum, wait until oil prices rise again. But I don't see any of it happening. Scotland's chance may have already been spent but Northern Ireland is in the best position of anyone. They're in the best position of all the UK 'principalities' to barter the best economic deal between either the UK or Ireland/EU. They can basically become the New Scotland and do what Scotland was doing, pre-Scottish independence vote. The SNP made a big mistake pushing for their vote before the EU-UK referendum. I expect Wales and England (outside of London) are pretty content with the outcome of the vote. They had the most to gain. Though I don't think NI and Scotland are going to lose economic power with an independent UK, if they don't start revolting. Interesting how it all turned out, because this time London was in agreement with the UK states on the periphery. It was Wales and England who wanted out, and I think this was rational and the right move from a working man's standpoint. The EU from what I've seen (I've lived and worked in the EU) is mostly beneficial the elites and people doing well. Most of my friends in France and other EU countries curse the EU a bit. It's not just the Brits who are upset with the undemocratic system the EU put into place or the policies. I watched all the Scottish independence debates with Alex Salmond vs Alistair Darling and was letdown by Salmond's general performance. Also recently watched the Brexit 'documentary' and was not impressed with the arguments put in place there. Especially the comparison to Switzerland which is the wrong example, for many reasons that I won't go into here. The UK may become a Norway of sorts but not a Switzerland. Honestly, not sure I'd want to become a Switzerland given how they make a lot of their money.

lucozade 10y ago
> The UK move is interesting Completely with you up to this point. > On Scotland, it seems to me that Scotland already got their vote 100% agree. If we hadn't just voted to leave the EU. There is every chance that a second referendum will have a significant backing in Scotland now. The last one died mostly from an economic argument. We've just royally blown that as the line "England can't be trusted with the economy" will have more than enough evidence regardless of the oil price. My guess is that it'll all come down to the EU's reaction. In the first ref they were against a break up so they said it would be difficult to re-join. If they spin that around and welcome Scotland, which is a very real possibility, then I think they'll go independent. > Northern Ireland is in the best position of anyone Indeed. But they'll not be a New Scotland. Scotland's pretty prosperous nowadays. NI not so much. But the EU is good at throwing cash at small nations so if they vote to leave the UK, and can stay in the EU, they'll be fine. Well, assuming that it doesn't re-ignite the Troubles, of course, which is a not insignificant risk if there's a strong push for a united Ireland. > I expect Wales and England ... had the most to gain Really? What I don't get is why the rural parts of England voted out. Westminster really couldn't give a shit about them. As far as I can tell, the whole economies of East Anglia and Wales are based on EU subsidies. I could understand (though not agree with) an immigration argument for cities but they all voted to stay except Birmingham. > The UK may become a Norway I sincerely hope not. It's got a much smaller economy that's really quite reliant on oil (though they're working on that). Fortunately we have a fairly large economy although it's centred on services so it's going to get a pummeling for a while. Hopefully we'll only regress about 5 years and not take a lot more than 10 years to make it back up. > of course the do-well Londoners want to be a part of the EU system This'll be me in case it wasn't clear from the rant. What's not massively clear though is, while a lot of England and Wales was doing badly in the EU, what is it about leaving that will turn, say Doncaster, into Croesusville?
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > What I don't get is why the rural parts of England voted out. Westminster really couldn't give a shit about them. As a distant observer, it seems to me that the second sentence is the resolution to the problem posted in the first: Westminster clearly wanted a "Remain" result, Westminster is seen as being unresponsive to the needs of the group in question, so there was a reaction against Westminster and in favor of groups challenging the consensus there. Now, it may not be rational to expect that the result of that would be a change in government that would result in Westminster caring, but voting is often emotional and not always rational.

lucozade 10y ago

> The UK move is interesting Completely with you up to this point. > On Scotland, it seems to me that Scotland already got their vote 100% agree. If we hadn't just voted to leave the EU. There is every chance that a second referendum will have a significant backing in Scotland now. The last one died mostly from an economic argument. We've just royally blown that as the line "England can't be trusted with the economy" will have more than enough evidence regardless of the oil price. My guess is that it'll all come down to the EU's reaction. In the first ref they were against a break up so they said it would be difficult to re-join. If they spin that around and welcome Scotland, which is a very real possibility, then I think they'll go independent. > Northern Ireland is in the best position of anyone Indeed. But they'll not be a New Scotland. Scotland's pretty prosperous nowadays. NI not so much. But the EU is good at throwing cash at small nations so if they vote to leave the UK, and can stay in the EU, they'll be fine. Well, assuming that it doesn't re-ignite the Troubles, of course, which is a not insignificant risk if there's a strong push for a united Ireland. > I expect Wales and England ... had the most to gain Really? What I don't get is why the rural parts of England voted out. Westminster really couldn't give a shit about them. As far as I can tell, the whole economies of East Anglia and Wales are based on EU subsidies. I could understand (though not agree with) an immigration argument for cities but they all voted to stay except Birmingham. > The UK may become a Norway I sincerely hope not. It's got a much smaller economy that's really quite reliant on oil (though they're working on that). Fortunately we have a fairly large economy although it's centred on services so it's going to get a pummeling for a while. Hopefully we'll only regress about 5 years and not take a lot more than 10 years to make it back up. > of course the do-well Londoners want to be a part of the EU system This'll be me in case it wasn't clear from the rant. What's not massively clear though is, while a lot of England and Wales was doing badly in the EU, what is it about leaving that will turn, say Doncaster, into Croesusville?

dragonwriter 10y ago
> What I don't get is why the rural parts of England voted out. Westminster really couldn't give a shit about them. As a distant observer, it seems to me that the second sentence is the resolution to the problem posted in the first: Westminster clearly wanted a "Remain" result, Westminster is seen as being unresponsive to the needs of the group in question, so there was a reaction against Westminster and in favor of groups challenging the consensus there. Now, it may not be rational to expect that the result of that would be a change in government that would result in Westminster caring, but voting is often emotional and not always rational.