If we vote for Brexit what happens

mayonnaise

Ballard wrote: »

I'm pretty bored with this thread as the same arguments keep getting repeated by both sides but this article expresses my thoughts pretty darned well so I thought that I'd post it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/13/brexit-leave-voters-theresa-may-promise?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

A Brexit betrayal is coming – but who will get the blame?

Remainers probably.

Conrad

I'd say splitting a nation in two is far more complex than leaving the EU.

Lets look at the separation of Czechoslovakia;


Czechoslovakia

On July 17 V1992, the Slovak parliament adopted the Declaration of independence of the Slovak nation. Six days later, politicians decided to dissolve Czechoslovakia at a meeting in Bratislava.


The goal of negotiations switched to achieving a peaceful division. On November 13, the Federal Assembly passed Constitution Act 541 which settled the division of property between the Czech lands and Slovakia. With Constitution Act 542, passed on November 25, they agreed to the dissolution of Czechoslovakia as of December 31, 1992.

Economy

The dissolution had some negative impact on the two economies, especially in 1993, as traditional links needed to accommodate the bureaucracy of international trade were severed, but the impact was considerably lower than expected by many people.





http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Dissolution_of_Czechoslovakia

Ballard

mayonnaise wrote: »

Remainers probably.

Being as the Brexiteers generally want different things from leaving the EU I'm expecting the majority of the population to be unhappy with the outcome. As I've posted previously I think that the phrase 'this isn't what I voted for' will be heard countless times.

Perhaps I'll be proved wrong and everyone will be delighted but if I am proved to be correct then I think that the blame will be split between remainders, MPs and the EU.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

I think you throw accusations of racism around far too easily. I reckon what you are describing would be more accurately described as prejudice. I've never seen any evidence that Scottish people think they are racially superior to the English. I think racism is most usefully used as a term in the USA or SA eg apartheid...Ku Klux etc.

the UK law says

Race discrimination
The Equality Act 2010 makes it unlawful to discriminate against employees, job seekers and trainees because of race - this includes the different elements of colour, nationality, and ethnic or national origin.

the scots discriminate on grounds of nationality certainly and maybe thnk they are racial distinct (and not inferior)

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

the UK law says



the scots discriminate on grounds of nationality certainly and maybe thnk they are racial distinct (and not inferior)

Hmmm.... I wonder who you mean by 'the scots'....all of them, some of them, those from Glasgow??? What's the evidence of their discrimination by the way?

Masomnia

setmefree2 wrote: »

More confusion from Labour as Keir contradicts Corbyn and Abbot.





https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-13/u-k-labour-party-s-starmer-pledges-to-fight-hard-brexit-plans

Definitely positioning himself for leader. Good on him!

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

Hmmm.... I wonder who you mean by 'the scots'....all of them, some of them, those from Glasgow??? What's the evidence of their discrimination by the way?

I've already answered that in the post that said

Originally Posted by CLAPTON View Post
in general I would say 'xenophobia is the general dislike of foreigners.
Some scots have a specific dislike of the English which I would call racism; The general 'anyone but the english' is not really about the Westminster parliament but a general chip on the shoulder and inferiority complex that shows itself as racism.

kabayiri

setmefree2 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38297595

There was an interesting comment on Radio 5 yesterday.

They differentiated the role of Guy Verhofstadt and Michel Barnier, the EU chief negotiator.

Michel B is the primary contact tasked with coming up with a deal between the EU and UK.

Guy V and the other EU politicians will then have to decide whether such a deal is acceptable.

Given this, I wonder whether early commentary from the likes of Guy or even Nicola Sturgeon is welcome.

It all seems like superfluous noise at the moment. We need some initial negotiations during the early stages of A50 to establish the relative positions and priorities of both sides.

gfplux

Ballard wrote: »

I'm pretty bored with this thread as the same arguments keep getting repeated by both sides but this article expresses my thoughts pretty darned well so I thought that I'd post it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/13/brexit-leave-voters-theresa-may-promise?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Thank you for the link

CLAPTON

Ballard wrote: »

I'm pretty bored with this thread as the same arguments keep getting repeated by both sides but this article expresses my thoughts pretty darned well so I thought that I'd post it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/13/brexit-leave-voters-theresa-may-promise?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

interesting that there is so much about the horrors of inward investment.

while I have posted about the logical consequences of inward investment (foreign ownership of UK assets, loss of profits/dividend that will go to the overseas owners), the 'remain ' camp seemed to sing the praises of foreign ownership as a major benefit of staying in europe.
Still events make strange bed fellows.