I thought sb73 would like this to cheer him up! World’s 400 Richest People Lose $127 Billion on Brexit
As has been mentioned the pound is recovering and the Footsie is where it was last Monday, it shows that Bankers and Brokers are the 'players' and their greedy speculation is what can result in hard times for all. The fact so many of them got their fingers burnt by miscalculating the result is perhaps the one thing both sides of this argument should celebrate...
But that's kinda the point, Ossie. On something this important the non-voter is once again saying that they're ambivalent on the outcome. Whilst this is neither a ringing endorsement of Remain or Leave, a whopping three out of every ten voters were saying that they were prepared to let others decide their future for them, even if that meant a period of gross uncertainty. You either believe in democracy or you don't. To have a referendum requiring 2/3rd support or giving more weight to younger voters etc. doesn't much feel like a democratic process. We'll be heading towards Silver Surfer Suffrage or something down that route. Cameron was an idiot for offering the referendum in the first place. The best thing that Parliament can do now is force a General Election in the autumn and have one party standing on a Remain ticket. Let's then see if the electorate feels it's made a mistake or not. The problem is that our political elite seem more than ever out of step with the electorate.
It's done now. We have to move on. Learn the lessons from this, sure, but everyone will have their own idea in their head of what the lesson was for them and what to do about it. I am still of the opinion that the EU was not the cause of many of the issues people were upset about but that doesn't matter any more - many of them did, voted "Leave", and we're (I guess) leaving. It seems to be generally accepted now that many people used this referendum to protest at the way Westminster has let them down and not listened to them. EU issues didn't matter to them except as a focal point for their frustration and anger. The next question is "What will change?". There is going to be regime change within the government. Will the new regime treat those people any differently? Will the new regime look for new targets? Can the new regime refer back to the 2015 election and say they still have the same mandate? Will they call an election before 2020 to get their mandate from us? Will there be an effective, electable alternative? I don't know! Anyone got a clue?
Doubly seconded The best thing that Parliament can do now is force a General Election in the autumn and have one party standing on a Remain ticket. Let's then see if the electorate feels it's made a mistake or not. The problem is that our political elite seem more than ever out of step with the electorate. I so agree with this...Uber this is the best post I have read in days/or months. However I have stated that we must accept the referendum as binding, because sure as eggs are aggs if we had voted remain, there would be no second chance. I cannot see this happening.
Woke up this morning And it's all true. Who should I be listening to on the practicalities of what happens next? We have less than 20 people with experience of negotiating trade treaties We have 40 years worth of EU/UK legislation to work through (7-10 years worth of parliamentary time) to decide what we keep and what we dump. We have no one in authority prepared or able to set out a plan. Of course I respect the result, but I see no reason why the Tories need 3 months to select a new leader while we sit in this limbo, especially if it also requires a general election to legitimise it (And I do not believe British politics can realign itself to give us a clear Brexit government in the time available anyway). It's not the fact of Brexit that will do the damage its the uncertainty. It's in everyone's interest - ours and the EUs - to get moving on this, rather than have our future held hostage by the Tory party again. The timetable for the leadership election for the Tories is not set in stone and can easily be speeded up. The country requires a Brexit government now, and I don't think we need a general election - we have voted Brexit, let's get a Brexit government in (and the Tories are the only option for this) and let them go until 2020. im sure a lot of those people create wealth for many others by making things and providing services that other people want. Totally different to parasites. Yes.
Isn't it interesting that we have had a democratic process that produced a clear winner, the majority was over 1.2 million, yet there are petitions for another referendum, changing the process to have a 60% threshold for the winner and even to have London stay in the EU. Had the result been as forecast, 52-48 to remain would there have been the whingeing for similar changes? I think not. It is mainly left-wing younger voters who seem to have great difficulty accepting the majority verdict whenever a vote produces a result they don't like. No doubt there will be G20 style protests in the next few weeks and, if there is some undoubted 'turbulence' in the economy we'll see even more unrest. I think there may be some difficult times ahead in the next few months...
Many people really struggle with the concept of democracy, with many believing that you simply can't trust the public to give you the result you want. The leaders of the EU are a prime example of this. I get the impression that many youngsters these days are incredibly precious and feel the need to whine about being "wronged" at every opportunity.
A lot of people in my generation can't take losing. People going on a rampage after the Tories won an election FFS. Then again it wasn't that long ago the previous generation were smashing up Mercedes after Euro 96- you wouldn't want to be working on the checkout at Iceland on Tuesday. Then again, I can see the point of view that it's the young getting ****ed royally by the old. The baby boomers have had it pretty good IMO.
Totally Yorkshire. I said before the result on here that if we stayed in i would accept it and i would have. My Facebook is a nightmare so i am not going on it for a bit as people thinking its the end of the world! On another note i could not sleep last night and was up at 2;30am so i watched a bit of the sky news stations CNN Fox RT CCTV (you know the sky ones). I was shocked listening to all the US analysts who thought we were better off out. They said the EU was not good for us. They also said they would always trade with us and nothing would change "why would it" as one said. They have no agenda like the Leave/Remain teams and it was refreshing to hear their views. I am not stupid about all this and i know things will change. As one of the US blokes said "England cannot just set up manufacturing plants over night, it will take years". Over the years we have devalued much of our manufacturing (Thanks Tony Blair. I was young once but older people voted him in) . I also blame the Tories for this as well. As a country we need to stick together and move forward because things cannot go back to what it was.
OK, seeing as none of our Brexit leaders are saying anything other than 'nothing hasty' (other than Farage) let's see what people think about our future relationship with the EU, which will dominate the Article 50 discussions. I think there are 3 basic options (but we have to be clear that the EU decides what's on offer, my understanding is that we start the exit process but they tell us what is on the table): - ask to stay in the Single Market. Advantages: stability, maintains current trade arrangements, maintains financial services ability to 'passport' with Eurozone, may satisfy Scotland and London, supported by majority of MPs, takes us out of agricultural and fisheries EU policy...and TIPP with the US (?). Disadvantages: would require us to keep freedom of movement and pay into EU budget, with no influence on spending, still need to adopt EU regulations on goods and services - negotiate a separate treaty like Canada. Advantages - can exclude freedom of movement and EU budget contributions, will be tailor made for us if we can get the 27 to agree, and given our existing level of economic integration with EU countries will probably be better than the Canada version. Disadvantages: will be time consuming and complicated to negotiate and depends on a level of goodwill from EU countries, very unlikely to include financial services, will still require meeting EU standards on goods. - opt for no treaty at least in the short term and adopt World Trade Organisation standards. Advantages: quick, simple, does not require negotiation, buys time to really think about future, no free movement of people or payments to the EU. Disadvantages: offers least certainty and stability, no way financial services will be included, tariffs applied both ways hit the weaker currency hardest. May make it viable for EU countries to develop their own industries to provide what they bought from us. Of course I would favour staying part of the single market, but that defeats the point of voting Brexit and I don't think it can happen. Though technically it could, we voted to leave the EU, not the single market. I suspect the EU might say go for WTO while we sort out the treaties we are already negotiating with the US etc. It's a boring set of questions, but the kind of stuff our leaders need to be making their views clear on now. Any other options out there?
I do agree you cannot weight a vote in favour of young or the age of voters, or requre more than 50% at a general election, but requirement of a larger majority for a referendum on such a fundamental change as this is valid, particularly when there is a large % not voting. Not all the no voters were necessarily apathetic. Some may have been genuinely undecided (campaigning was emotive an full of lies which Farage has even admitted) , some may have refused to take part in what they felt was and unnecessary vote, others physically unable to vote when the day came.
From BBC: "It is a matter of fact that the older you are, the more likely you are to make the effort to vote - 78% of those 65 or over voted in the 2015 election, compared with 43% of 18-24 year olds and 54% of 25-34 year olds. Looks like the younger folks let themselves down to some degree. I saw it too and agree.
England v Scotland, young v old, metropolitan v country, educated v uneducated, North v South, right wingTories v one nation tories, left wing labour v right wing labour; some of the voting stats I see on how people voted show the vote has done a very good job of dividing people on many lines. I don't think it's going to be practical to say, ok, let's all go back to being labour, lib Dems, Tories now. That's as much for the politicians as the voters
If the result had gone the other way would the Ukip supporters have clapped their hands said 'well played sir' and given up their struggle - no, they wouldn't and neither do I. I will never accept a World in which people are judged according to their nationality, race, religion or their supposed economic value - or a World which creates barriers and artificial divisions between people. I will never accept a World which is always looking for scapegoats - whether the EU. immigrants, the Scots, the Unions (I've heard it all at some time) - maybe middle England will run out of these at some stage. Maybe Britain should also be placing its own democratic processes under the microscope - is there another land in Europe where so many newspapers are allowed to tell their readers directly how they should be voting ? Or another land where grand TV. debates reduce the whole thing to the crudest personality politics ?
