3 ms·

Do not be so so harsh on the people who wanted the brexit. They have made a mistake, probably. Some of them realize that. As a pro eu person from nl(if that ev

Do not be so so harsh on the people who wanted the brexit. They have made a mistake, probably. Some of them realize that. As a pro eu person from nl(if that even exists) i would prefer not to give uk a hard time to come back on their decision. And even íf they really quit: we still have to work together. It is in interest of all of us to have the uk with us. It is just impossible to negotiate for brexit and cherry pick all the good parts of the eu, while not doing something in return. They will end up with a eu type of deal, with a few minor things stripped off. Or a hard brexit, which may not even happen. It is a shitty situation, which starts to affect my life as well. I have some stocks on a company “degiro” which has its license in the uk. This is a problem because i am unsure what is going to happen. I moved my investments to a broker with dutch bank accounts and licenses.

raverbashing 8y ago
Fair enough > They will end up with a eu, with a few minor things stripped off. Maybe. They had that already
matthewmacleod 8y ago
That's the ideal outcome. The problem is that rhetoric in the UK has shifted away from "Leave the EU in a structured manner with most of the bits intact" to "full-scale immediate departure with no planning for the future". That's going to be a medium-term disaster. Honestly the problem isn't Brexit itself. I don't agree with that policy, but it's possible to see how it could be executed in a constructive and honest fashion. If we were able to accept that there are benefits to EU membership, but that we were willing to give those up in exchange for theoretically greater sovereignty, the situation would be better. If we were working towards a scenario that was minimally damaging, while importantly being honest about the tradeoffs, then the country would make some progress. Instead we have an absolute catastrophe of untruth circulating. Large parts of the party of government appear to be aiming for a no-deal, cliff-edge event, claiming that everything will be fine. A huge share of the population seem to think that "no deal" means "status quo" instead of "immediate large-scale problems". I don't know how we deal with that. We're genuinely in the time of post-facts, post-truth politics, and I don't know that we currently have the tools to fix that.

raverbashing 8y ago

Fair enough > They will end up with a eu, with a few minor things stripped off. Maybe. They had that already

matthewmacleod 8y ago

That's the ideal outcome. The problem is that rhetoric in the UK has shifted away from "Leave the EU in a structured manner with most of the bits intact" to "full-scale immediate departure with no planning for the future". That's going to be a medium-term disaster. Honestly the problem isn't Brexit itself. I don't agree with that policy, but it's possible to see how it could be executed in a constructive and honest fashion. If we were able to accept that there are benefits to EU membership, but that we were willing to give those up in exchange for theoretically greater sovereignty, the situation would be better. If we were working towards a scenario that was minimally damaging, while importantly being honest about the tradeoffs, then the country would make some progress. Instead we have an absolute catastrophe of untruth circulating. Large parts of the party of government appear to be aiming for a no-deal, cliff-edge event, claiming that everything will be fine. A huge share of the population seem to think that "no deal" means "status quo" instead of "immediate large-scale problems". I don't know how we deal with that. We're genuinely in the time of post-facts, post-truth politics, and I don't know that we currently have the tools to fix that.