If there is a second referendum ...

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Only 4 make a net contribution, one of which is the UK. The UK leaving will have an impact.

It doesn't fit in with the self loathing Remoaner narrative but apparently the loss of the UK is equivalent to the loss of the 18 smallest EU economies in one hit.

johnhemming

Herzlos wrote: »

Yet apart form concerns about Sterling falling and losing free healthcare you're pretty well insulated from everything else.

There are all sorts of protections that come from trade agreements. In some countries (eg Bulgaria) there were rules about buying land if you were not a citizen (particularly farm land). Not being in the EU could undermine the property rights of citizens of countries who are not members of the EU.

andrewf75

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Only 4 make a net contribution, one of which is the UK. The UK leaving will have an impact.

Is anyone suggesting otherwise?

kabayiri

Could they bind up another referendum with a General Election?

It seems clear that a referendum on it's own is flawed if the political layer is not aligned with the results the referendum delivers.

Herzlos

A general election would presumably be easier for May and the Tories as they can frame it as anti-corbyn rather than any stance on brexit.

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

By next year the non-euro countries will either by sidelined or ejected. The eu is not satisfied with having bankrupted Greece, Portugal and Italy along with others, it wants to bankrupt the rest too. It wants a single tax regime, single fiscal regime, it wants the Stock Exchange to be moved to Frankfurt.

Basically, if we don't leave now we would either be thrown out next year or have to take the euro and be totally destroyed, we would be stripped of our fiscal infrastructure and our parliament would become totally ineffective.

If the EU was going to hand you your brexit next year, either by kicking us out or forcing the euro, why bother with this whole charade?

Thrugelmir

andrewf75 wrote: »

Is anyone suggesting otherwise?

Arguably yes.

Herzlos

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Arguably yes.

Can you back that argument up in any way? Because I've never seen it.

Kohoutek

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Only 4 make a net contribution, one of which is the UK. The UK leaving will have an impact.

There are 8 countries if you include the EFTA states. I think that's fair given Brexiteers are overwhelmingly advocating both leaving the EU and not being in the single market (although of course that wasn't the line taken during the referendum).

Kohoutek

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

By next year the non-euro countries will either by sidelined or ejected. The eu is not satisfied with having bankrupted Greece, Portugal and Italy along with others, it wants to bankrupt the rest too. It wants a single tax regime, single fiscal regime, it wants the Stock Exchange to be moved to Frankfurt.

Basically, if we don't leave now we would either be thrown out next year or have to take the euro and be totally destroyed, we would be stripped of our fiscal infrastructure and our parliament would become totally ineffective.

Nope.

Apart your predictions and version of reality being so wacky that even Nigel Farage would probably say they're outlandish

(1) the UK has a permanent opt-out from the euro.
(2) there is no mechanism to unilaterally eject a member state
(3) all treaty changes, such as expanding the scope of EU powers, require unanimous approval of member states.

Enterprise_1701C

Yes we have a "permanent" opt out from the euro, but it does not stop the eu sidelining countries that do not take the euro.

The eu would almost certainly find a way of ejecting a member state if they wanted to, they do after all write their own rulebook.

Treaty changes only require unanimous approval because of the veto, and the eu plan to do away with the vetoes and go over to qm voting.