Swiss offer EU solution for Britain

mwpt

Malthusian wrote: »

The problem with the idea that Brits voted Leave because they were dissatisfied with life / government / the country as a whole and /or because they love a good moan, is that if this were the case, the Scottish referendum would have seen a landside for independence.

The British voted Leave because they wanted to leave the EU - badly enough that it overcame the overwhelming advantage of the status quo option.

Well I guess our perceptions differ.

Btw, I feel I should apoligise about the "moany Brits" comment but it really was meant in the "cliched" sense. Even Brits say, we Brits love a good moan. But they are also known for digging in and getting the job done, so it works both ways.

As for differing perceptions, my view is also that the British people voted leave because they wanted to leave the EU. But that doesn't tell us much. Why? I still have not heard a convincing argument for how life is going to improve outside of the EU and I am very firmly of the opinion that the overwhelming majority who voted to leave haven't got a clue either. I am pretty smart. I do not understand trade deals. I can't pretend to know what deals we'll strike, what brexit will look like, what globalisation will do going forward, and so forth. And I've tried to understand by reading the informed blogs I've come across (rather than the daily mail). I know this sounds stubborn but you'd have to work very hard to convince me that the average fairly uneducated person knows more about this than most of us on this forum and from what I can see on this forum there is nothing but speculation. So it stands to reason that if people had no clue how their life was going to be better outside the EU, they were voting because they perceived their current lot as somehow a bit sh _t (*). So, "my lot is a bit sh _t" and I don't know how to change that, translates into a protest vote, which was quite obviously a vote to LEAVE.

(*) I also question life being a bit sh _t. I think what has happened is that people got quite a lot richer in in the latter half of the 20th century but now that globalisation and automation are kicking in, this pace slowed and inequality rose. This leads to resentment even when your life is still slowly improving, just not as quickly as before. Then, on top of that, we had the worst global recession in 80 years which did in fact result in millions of people becoming worse off.

N1AK

Malthusian wrote: »

The problem with the idea that Brits voted Leave because they were dissatisfied with life / government / the country as a whole and /or because they love a good moan, is that if this were the case, the Scottish referendum would have seen a landside for independence.

The British voted Leave because they wanted to leave the EU - badly enough that it overcame the overwhelming advantage of the status quo option.

The Scottish referendum vote was far closer than was expected prior to the referendum being announced. My understanding is that polling on Brexit didn't swing any further than the Indy Ref, so unless you've got data to show that I don't see what backs your claim up.

I don't think anyone can claim they know why the British chose to vote as they did; not least because I doubt there was any one single set of shared reasons that accounted for a sizable majority.

I know people who at least claim to have primarily voted to leave for at least 3 different reasons. Some say it was 'democracy', plenty said it was to do with EU policies/rules, and I genuinely do know a couple who say they did it as a FU to Westminster.


I think it's a pretty widely accepted point that people who are satisfied/happy are less likely to support change. I have no doubt at all that many of the issues in Europe are at least exacerbated by the extended period of slow economic growth.

GDP per capita has increased by less than 4% in a decade after nearly 40 years of consistently much faster growth (something like 25% per decade!).

If the UK wages had kept growing at pre-2008 rates average weekly pay would be around £600 now instead of £500. People would be earning more and we wouldn't have needed austerity (even if some spending control would still have been wise). Is it really hard to believe that if people find it easier to get jobs, and enjoy regular pay rises they'd be less inclined to push for change than when their pay is frozen for years and funding for services they use is being aggressively cut?

Conrad

mwpt wrote: »

Well I guess our perceptions differ.

Btw, I feel I should apoligise about the "moany Brits" comment but it really was meant in the "cliched" sense. Even Brits say, we Brits love a good moan. But they are also known for digging in and getting the job done, so it works both ways.

As for differing perceptions, my view is also that the British people voted leave because they wanted to leave the EU. But that doesn't tell us much. Why? I still have not heard a convincing argument for how life is going to improve outside of the EU and I am very firmly of the opinion that the overwhelming majority who voted to leave haven't got a clue either. I am pretty smart. I do not understand trade deals. I can't pretend to know what deals we'll strike, what brexit will look like, what globalisation will do going forward, and so forth. And I've tried to understand by reading the informed blogs I've come across (rather than the daily mail). I know this sounds stubborn but you'd have to work very hard to convince me that the average fairly uneducated person knows more about this than most of us on this forum and from what I can see on this forum there is nothing but speculation. So it stands to reason that if people had no clue how their life was going to be better outside the EU, they were voting because they perceived their current lot as somehow a bit sh _t (*). So, "my lot is a bit sh _t" and I don't know how to change that, translates into a protest vote, which was quite obviously a vote to LEAVE.

(*) I also question life being a bit sh _t. I think what has happened is that people got quite a lot richer in in the latter half of the 20th century but now that globalisation and automation are kicking in, this pace slowed and inequality rose. This leads to resentment even when your life is still slowly improving, just not as quickly as before. Then, on top of that, we had the worst global recession in 80 years which did in fact result in millions of people becoming worse off.

You put this very well.


In the end though, enough of us felt instinctively that big is not necessarily beautiful, and that being nimble, locally tailored and autonomous will go a long way in this world. Remainers always told us we're sovereign and that the EU has little say over our laws, and yet now they tell us it will take 10 years to untangle an immensity of EU law - huh?


There are big splits in the EU, the Med' group, the Visegrad Group and other splits, with Luxembourg calling for Hungary to be thrown out and many other emerging tensions.


I'm glad we're getting out the mess and taking our own seat at the global top tables alongside other prospering in dependant nations unafraid of world

TrickyTree83

mwpt wrote: »

Well I guess our perceptions differ.

Btw, I feel I should apoligise about the "moany Brits" comment but it really was meant in the "cliched" sense. Even Brits say, we Brits love a good moan. But they are also known for digging in and getting the job done, so it works both ways.

As for differing perceptions, my view is also that the British people voted leave because they wanted to leave the EU. But that doesn't tell us much. Why? I still have not heard a convincing argument for how life is going to improve outside of the EU and I am very firmly of the opinion that the overwhelming majority who voted to leave haven't got a clue either. I am pretty smart. I do not understand trade deals. I can't pretend to know what deals we'll strike, what brexit will look like, what globalisation will do going forward, and so forth. And I've tried to understand by reading the informed blogs I've come across (rather than the daily mail). I know this sounds stubborn but you'd have to work very hard to convince me that the average fairly uneducated person knows more about this than most of us on this forum and from what I can see on this forum there is nothing but speculation. So it stands to reason that if people had no clue how their life was going to be better outside the EU, they were voting because they perceived their current lot as somehow a bit sh _t (*). So, "my lot is a bit sh _t" and I don't know how to change that, translates into a protest vote, which was quite obviously a vote to LEAVE.

(*) I also question life being a bit sh _t. I think what has happened is that people got quite a lot richer in in the latter half of the 20th century but now that globalisation and automation are kicking in, this pace slowed and inequality rose. This leads to resentment even when your life is still slowly improving, just not as quickly as before. Then, on top of that, we had the worst global recession in 80 years which did in fact result in millions of people becoming worse off.

Surly that stance doesn't also apply to the view that I and some (few?) others have of EEA/EFTA membership even with FoM, so that the modus operandi of the UK is trading union with everyone, political union with none.

Kohoutek

Conrad wrote: »

You put this very well.


In the end though, enough of us felt instinctively that big is not necessarily beautiful, and that being nimble, locally tailored and autonomous will go a long way in this world. Remainers always told us we're sovereign and that the EU has little say over our laws, and yet now they tell us it will take 10 years to untangle an immensity of EU law - huh?


There are big splits in the EU, the Med' group, the Visegrad Group and other splits, with Luxembourg calling for Hungary to be thrown out and many other emerging tensions.


I'm glad we're getting out the mess and taking our own seat at the global top tables alongside other prospering in dependant nations unafraid of world

Do you accept that people voted leave for many reasons, not just your own John Redwood influenced vision?

buglawton

Switzerland has 20% migrant population, the UK approx 8%.

I did wonder why Switzerland allowed that and concluded that the true-born Swiss are such a well-off aristocracy that they need a large serf population to keep them & their economy going.

However, Switzerland holds a couple of aces that the UK doesn't deign to want - yet: Frequent legally-binding referenda on topics that include migration. And an open-ended arrangement with the EU so it could haggle on trade terms if it really needed to reduce immigration.

Conrad

Kohoutek wrote: »

Do you accept that people voted leave for many reasons, not just your own John Redwood influenced vision?

Recent polling indicates taking back control of our nation (including trade and law) and immigration was the core motivator.


Polling shows most people were typically circumspect of the £350m p week message, as Politicians always give financial inducements.


Once out though it is true we say where that money goes.

N1AK

Conrad wrote: »

Recent polling indicates taking back control of our nation (including trade and law) and immigration was the core motivator.

Would you share that polling? I have serious doubts that any polling has been done that control of our laws, independent of the concept of controlling immigration, has been a primary motivator. Frankly, I'd be amazed if any pollster has even asked a question that meaningfully measures whether the population want to take back control of trade.

Polling on control of laws invariably ends up asking questions that are too open ended to draw firm conclusions. Like, for example, if a poll asked people if they are in favour of judges being allowed to sentence people to capital punishment, then claiming that the result proves many people want to kill thieves. They might, or maybe they only want it applying to a very narrow set of criminals and wouldn't want judges to have the freedom to sentence thieves to death.

I remember a conversation with some family about the issue of our freedom to control our own laws in the period before the referendum. A family member thought it was wrong that the ECHR had stopped us doing various things, but fully supported their decision to stop an elderly couple from being separated in different homes; in the end they realised they didn't care very much about the fact it was 'europe' making the decision, she simply didn't like some of the decisions.

Money_saving_maniac

mwpt wrote: »

Well I guess our perceptions differ.

Btw, I feel I should apoligise about the "moany Brits" comment but it really was meant in the "cliched" sense. Even Brits say, we Brits love a good moan. But they are also known for digging in and getting the job done, so it works both ways.

As for differing perceptions, my view is also that the British people voted leave because they wanted to leave the EU. But that doesn't tell us much. Why? I still have not heard a convincing argument for how life is going to improve outside of the EU and I am very firmly of the opinion that the overwhelming majority who voted to leave haven't got a clue either. I am pretty smart. I do not understand trade deals. I can't pretend to know what deals we'll strike, what brexit will look like, what globalisation will do going forward, and so forth. And I've tried to understand by reading the informed blogs I've come across (rather than the daily mail). I know this sounds stubborn but you'd have to work very hard to convince me that the average fairly uneducated person knows more about this than most of us on this forum and from what I can see on this forum there is nothing but speculation. So it stands to reason that if people had no clue how their life was going to be better outside the EU, they were voting because they perceived their current lot as somehow a bit sh _t (*). So, "my lot is a bit sh _t" and I don't know how to change that, translates into a protest vote, which was quite obviously a vote to LEAVE.
.

Not everything can be given a price. Not everybody voted the way they did because 'there was something in it for them'

And that, if you ask me, is the real British spirit in a nutshell, and is why we fought in two World Wars when we could have avoided it, and then fought Argentina over the Falklands.

This is the reason that not everyone wants to be ruled from Brussels.

The real problem with immigration is that the immigrants are all coming for 'what is in it for them', with no loyalty to their new country. If a different country offered something they thought better, they'd go there instead. It's a flag of convenience, and as such however hard such people work, we are better off without having any more of them, no matter where they come from.

It's not just about the population density and the driving down of wages, nor about the huge amount of benefit fraud, not about the massive costs to the NHS. There truly is no strength in diversity, just weakness. Divide and conquer is the phrase, and diversity leads to division, not unity.

Lack of cohesion in society leads to all the modern ills, and the grand Euro federal project is doomed to failure, just like the Tower of Babel.

I proudly state that I voted leave because I thought it the best thing for my country, not because there was 'something in it for me' or as some kind of weak minded stupid protest vote.

I proudly tell you that my husband is Swedish, and came to this country to be with me, and even though we do not know what is going to happen to us as a couple, I would not betray my principles by voting 'remain' or abstaining.

I do not understand how anyone can be so weak minded as to believe that over half of those who voted did so 'because their lives are a bit sh%t'.

mwpt

Money_saving_maniac wrote: »

Not everything can be given a price. Not everybody voted the way they did because 'there was something in it for them'

And that, if you ask me, is the real British spirit in a nutshell, and is why we fought in two World Wars when we could have avoided it, and then fought Argentina over the Falklands.

This is the reason that not everyone wants to be ruled from Brussels.

The real problem with immigration is that the immigrants are all coming for 'what is in it for them', with no loyalty to their new country. If a different country offered something they thought better, they'd go there instead. It's a flag of convenience, and as such however hard such people work, we are better off without having any more of them, no matter where they come from.

Thank you, you have just described me. I guess that is why we will not see eye to eye on this subject. You do not want me in your country.

I have previously posted about how much I have integrated into UK society. Nevertheless, my experiences have taught me that nationalism is a bad thing and I now consider myself a citizen of the world and will gladly move to new places for new experiences with new people.

I consider your views small minded and harmful.

I proudly tell you that my husband is Swedish, and came to this country to be with me, and even though we do not know what is going to happen to us as a couple, I would not betray my principles by voting 'remain' or abstaining.

Your principles don't make any sense.

I do not understand how anyone can be so weak minded as to believe that over half of those who voted did so 'because their lives are a bit sh%t'.

That is probably because I never said that.