4 ms·

Relax. Britain was EU minus the Euro and the schengen. They gave up pure sovereignty without buying into the true core of the EU, which boils down to economics.

Relax. Britain was EU minus the Euro and the schengen. They gave up pure sovereignty without buying into the true core of the EU, which boils down to economics. I get it. If the UK didn't buy into the Euro (and retained fiat currency) and didn't buy into the schengen, what exactly were they getting from EU membership minus encroachment on sovereignty? Edit: since joining the EU, Britain has known nothing but austerity. Whether or not that had anything to do with EU membership, you can see how it was blamed, yes?

v1tyaz 10y ago
Access to the European single market and a large supply of skilled labour.
- themartorana 10y ago
  Existing trade agreements covered exports and remote labor has always been on the table.
  - johncolanduoni 10y ago
    Maybe this is getting blown up by the media, but I've seen a lot of tech people in the UK on HN and elsewhere looking (sometimes desperately) for other opportunities. Even if future agreements don't make it harder for them to remain and work in the UK on paper, it may still cause a lot of skilled labor to leave the UK purely due to perception. That's assuming that it remains just as easy to do so, which seems unlikely given immigration was part of what was driving the leave vote. Even if it is still easier in absolute terms for someone in the EU to work in the UK than the US, the lowered differential could have pretty negative effects on the market for high-demand jobs.
  - izacus 10y ago
    Really? Because I explicitly remember that running a company and dealing with other European countries has been hell of paperwork, lawyers, different standards and protectionism which made running a company that sold goods or software across Europe extremely complicated before entry of the coutry into EU in 2004. Just the standardization of financial (global VAT system, unified taxes, etc.) and regulatory (if an item is legal in one EU country then it's legal in another) has brought so much more commerce, jobs and startups that I doubt people in this topic born after EU can even fanthom.
- baddox 10y ago
  That's a big deal, but there could and should be free trade and labor mobility between countries whether or not those countries are part of the EU or a similar organization. It is almost guaranteed to be good for any pair of countries.
- dingaling 10y ago
  > Access to the European single market and a large supply of skilled labour. Membership of the EEA provides both: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_6.5.3.html http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.ht... "The purpose of the European Economic Area (EEA) is to extend the EU’s internal market to countries in the European Free Trade Area (EFTA). These countries either do not wish to join the EU or have not yet done so." "The EEA incorporates the four freedoms of the internal market (free movement of goods, people, services and capital)" Which is basically what the people of the UK chose in 1975 with the EEC, before it grew into the EU.
thomasfoster96 10y ago
Britain has always had 'pure sovereignty'. With or without the EU, their parliament can do pretty much anything it wants (the US or Australian legislatures are quite limited), including leaving the EU. Re: Austerity/neoliberalism, that's got very little to do with the EU and a lot to with Thatcher being elected in 1979, with the only non-Conservative government since then being Tony Blair - who wasn't exactly economically left wing.
- themartorana 10y ago
  Re: austerity, my point was more to do with what it was blamed on, not so much the actual root cause. Either way, I'm personally against austerity in down markets, but personal proclivities aside, I can see recent austerity being associated with EU membership - especially while watching Greece suffer, despite the enormous differences in economics. When you're looking to blame someone for recent suffering, it doesn't so much matter the actual cause, so much as the perceived...
- rayiner 10y ago
  They didn't. The EU Parliament and the Commission could make laws directly binding on British citizens even if the British government opposed them. That's not sovereignty.
  - airesQ 10y ago
    The EU Parliament only has the powers that have been given to it by the House of Common. The House of Commons is the sovereign. [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USTypBKEd8Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USTypBKEd8Y
    - rayiner 10y ago
      And the U.S. federal government has only the powers devolved to it by the sovereign states. But its hard to say U.S. states retain any meaningful sovereignty today.
      - 10y ago
airesQ 10y ago
Britain was a basket case before joining the EU. The 40 years of EU membership have, for the most part, been good [1]. The austerity stuff is a post 2008 thing. [1] - http://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/real-gdp-growth-55-14.png http://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/real...
cisstrd 10y ago
No, not the time to relax. This is is the time to worry, to worry big. Nigel Farage (UKIP - United Kingdom Independence Party) said that he hopes this will be the first brick removed from the wall that is the EU, and the rest will follow and crumble because of it. He hopes this will be the end of the EU (paraphrased from memory, saw it on TV during the live coverage). Only his opinion, but not unthinkable. United Kingdom might break up too - Scotland preparing legislation for a second referendum whether to be part of the United Kingdom already. Front National congratulated, Geert Wilders (PVV, Netherlands) thinks the Netherlands should have such a referendum too, and the PVV was elected 3rd strongest party in the elections 2012 and is currently ahead in many polls (next election before April 2017). Just a thought: ISIS is not stupid, if they are able to strategically make another terrorist attack months ahead of the French elections, what party will that help? The Front National does have a chance of winning, even if for now it seems unlikely, but hey, who would have thought Trump could win the the Republican nomination half a year ago?! Anti-Islam sentiment will result in more people fighting for ISIS, re-nationalisation will make the War on Terror less organized, focus will shift from fighting smart and doing so heads on to isolation and protectionism. Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) in Germany, anti-EU sentiment from the CSU (sister party of the CDU (Merkel's party) in Bavaria), Austria came close to electing an anti-European right-wing president... The PVV (Partij voor de Vrijheid - Party for Freedom) in the Netherlands, and in countries where the EU-hate is not coming from the right side, it often comes from the left. The sentiment for Re-nationalisation is a widespread phenomenon. We can discuss all we want about how the EU failed, but to say Britain in this case is not an important example of what can happen in other European countries is naive... I don't want to paint the devil onto the wall, but look in history how often times "we stumbled into war"[1] - I don't think we are there yet, just to make my point - never underestimate what can happen and looking at all the facts, we have all the reasons in the world to (at the very least) worry. [1] To stay in Europe: Also consider the Nato/Europe-Russia conflict, East Ukraine...
- airesQ 10y ago
  It is very hard for a country to leave the EU. Britain is yet to leave the EU, and we will probably end up with a leave in name only. Why is it difficult? Think about a US state secession. What if North Carolina decided to leave the US, imposed border controls, restricted the entry of US citizens, started drawing up its own regulations (totally different from the regulation from other states). The US would them impose tariffs. Hard to see how NC's economy would thrive. (Not due to US malice, but just due to the various barriers that have been introduced.)

v1tyaz 10y ago

Access to the European single market and a large supply of skilled labour.

themartorana 10y ago
Existing trade agreements covered exports and remote labor has always been on the table.
- johncolanduoni 10y ago
  Maybe this is getting blown up by the media, but I've seen a lot of tech people in the UK on HN and elsewhere looking (sometimes desperately) for other opportunities. Even if future agreements don't make it harder for them to remain and work in the UK on paper, it may still cause a lot of skilled labor to leave the UK purely due to perception. That's assuming that it remains just as easy to do so, which seems unlikely given immigration was part of what was driving the leave vote. Even if it is still easier in absolute terms for someone in the EU to work in the UK than the US, the lowered differential could have pretty negative effects on the market for high-demand jobs.
- izacus 10y ago
  Really? Because I explicitly remember that running a company and dealing with other European countries has been hell of paperwork, lawyers, different standards and protectionism which made running a company that sold goods or software across Europe extremely complicated before entry of the coutry into EU in 2004. Just the standardization of financial (global VAT system, unified taxes, etc.) and regulatory (if an item is legal in one EU country then it's legal in another) has brought so much more commerce, jobs and startups that I doubt people in this topic born after EU can even fanthom.
baddox 10y ago
That's a big deal, but there could and should be free trade and labor mobility between countries whether or not those countries are part of the EU or a similar organization. It is almost guaranteed to be good for any pair of countries.
dingaling 10y ago
> Access to the European single market and a large supply of skilled labour. Membership of the EEA provides both: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_6.5.3.html http://www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.ht... "The purpose of the European Economic Area (EEA) is to extend the EU’s internal market to countries in the European Free Trade Area (EFTA). These countries either do not wish to join the EU or have not yet done so." "The EEA incorporates the four freedoms of the internal market (free movement of goods, people, services and capital)" Which is basically what the people of the UK chose in 1975 with the EEC, before it grew into the EU.

thomasfoster96 10y ago

Britain has always had 'pure sovereignty'. With or without the EU, their parliament can do pretty much anything it wants (the US or Australian legislatures are quite limited), including leaving the EU. Re: Austerity/neoliberalism, that's got very little to do with the EU and a lot to with Thatcher being elected in 1979, with the only non-Conservative government since then being Tony Blair - who wasn't exactly economically left wing.

themartorana 10y ago
Re: austerity, my point was more to do with what it was blamed on, not so much the actual root cause. Either way, I'm personally against austerity in down markets, but personal proclivities aside, I can see recent austerity being associated with EU membership - especially while watching Greece suffer, despite the enormous differences in economics. When you're looking to blame someone for recent suffering, it doesn't so much matter the actual cause, so much as the perceived...
rayiner 10y ago
They didn't. The EU Parliament and the Commission could make laws directly binding on British citizens even if the British government opposed them. That's not sovereignty.
- airesQ 10y ago
  The EU Parliament only has the powers that have been given to it by the House of Common. The House of Commons is the sovereign. [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USTypBKEd8Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USTypBKEd8Y
  - rayiner 10y ago
    And the U.S. federal government has only the powers devolved to it by the sovereign states. But its hard to say U.S. states retain any meaningful sovereignty today.
    - 10y ago

airesQ 10y ago

Britain was a basket case before joining the EU. The 40 years of EU membership have, for the most part, been good [1]. The austerity stuff is a post 2008 thing. [1] - http://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/real-gdp-growth-55-14.png http://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/real...

cisstrd 10y ago

No, not the time to relax. This is is the time to worry, to worry big. Nigel Farage (UKIP - United Kingdom Independence Party) said that he hopes this will be the first brick removed from the wall that is the EU, and the rest will follow and crumble because of it. He hopes this will be the end of the EU (paraphrased from memory, saw it on TV during the live coverage). Only his opinion, but not unthinkable. United Kingdom might break up too - Scotland preparing legislation for a second referendum whether to be part of the United Kingdom already. Front National congratulated, Geert Wilders (PVV, Netherlands) thinks the Netherlands should have such a referendum too, and the PVV was elected 3rd strongest party in the elections 2012 and is currently ahead in many polls (next election before April 2017). Just a thought: ISIS is not stupid, if they are able to strategically make another terrorist attack months ahead of the French elections, what party will that help? The Front National does have a chance of winning, even if for now it seems unlikely, but hey, who would have thought Trump could win the the Republican nomination half a year ago?! Anti-Islam sentiment will result in more people fighting for ISIS, re-nationalisation will make the War on Terror less organized, focus will shift from fighting smart and doing so heads on to isolation and protectionism. Alternative für Deutschland (AFD) in Germany, anti-EU sentiment from the CSU (sister party of the CDU (Merkel's party) in Bavaria), Austria came close to electing an anti-European right-wing president... The PVV (Partij voor de Vrijheid - Party for Freedom) in the Netherlands, and in countries where the EU-hate is not coming from the right side, it often comes from the left. The sentiment for Re-nationalisation is a widespread phenomenon. We can discuss all we want about how the EU failed, but to say Britain in this case is not an important example of what can happen in other European countries is naive... I don't want to paint the devil onto the wall, but look in history how often times "we stumbled into war"[1] - I don't think we are there yet, just to make my point - never underestimate what can happen and looking at all the facts, we have all the reasons in the world to (at the very least) worry. [1] To stay in Europe: Also consider the Nato/Europe-Russia conflict, East Ukraine...

airesQ 10y ago
It is very hard for a country to leave the EU. Britain is yet to leave the EU, and we will probably end up with a leave in name only. Why is it difficult? Think about a US state secession. What if North Carolina decided to leave the US, imposed border controls, restricted the entry of US citizens, started drawing up its own regulations (totally different from the regulation from other states). The US would them impose tariffs. Hard to see how NC's economy would thrive. (Not due to US malice, but just due to the various barriers that have been introduced.)