Britain Sets Date for EU Referendum -- Brexit

[Icebound]

At this point we don't know if this was a real incident or a remain supporter trying to stir up propaganda in the face of their defeat at the polls.

I wasn't talking specifically about the supposed reasons for the referendum results.... nor about the Jo Cox situation. I was talking about the wave of racially-motivated incidents AFTER the referendum

:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-eu-referendum-racial-racism-abuse-hate-crime-reported-latest-leave-immigration-a7104191.html

[TimG]

I was talking about the wave of racially-motivated incidents AFTER the referendum

Is it a wave or is it an illusion of a wave created by media coverage?

At this point in time the 'remainers' are desperate to make the choice seem as horrible as possible and what is reported in the media can't be considered to be a statistically valid sample.

[jbg]

At least not since it got its ass kicked by the Brits in 1812.

The British troops didn't fare too well against the U.S. The Canadian troops kicked our asses at Fort York (now Toronto) and other places. The British are bluff and bluster; the Canadians are quiet, effective fighters who I respect.

More schadenfreude against the British people! Its a good thing they can decide for themselves and not have others decide for them.

True they were pretty bankrupt, but they could have been obstinate. Incidentally I would say Britain didn't have much of a choice whether to stay in the EU or not. To remain as in India would have been certain doom.

The Brexit vote is opposed by people who want to tell the British what's good for them. Having a massive, unelected bureaucracy running their lives gave them no benefit. Europe is in a fix; the UK will do just fine.

[jbg]

This is a bit too simplistic. Its true that immigration was a big factor in the vote but just because someone is concerned about immigration does not mean they are racists. Further more the euro-skeptic movement in the UK has been growing for a long time... decades. And its really about the loss of sovereignty and people losing the ability to govern themselves in a national democracy.

I think this is one of the rare, though not unique, times we agree.

Well the one good thing about the EU is that it allowed Germany to take over without killing millions of people.

One of the reasons I support Brexit is that the EU was basically a takeover by Germany of Europe. We lost too many people in two world wars to give up without a fight. The EU was simply a benevolent and unelected version of the unelected Kaisers and Third Reich leader.

One positive thing about integration is that the more European states are dependent on each other and linked to one another the less likely they are to start gigantic wars every 50 years or so.

Canada and the US is a totally different dynamic. We are gnat living next to an elephant. Everyone knows who's in charge and there's nothing to fight about. Its a naturally symbiotic relationship.

Canada and the U.S. actually have a lot to teach the world. Even if your reference to the quote of Trudeau the Smarter (with the mouse morphing into a gnat) were accurate, has the U.S. shown any territorial ambitions since 1815?

Having said that, globalists and free traders would like to crush democracy in Canada and the US as well. If we ratify the TPP we surrender the right for democratically elected governments to write laws around things like patents, and intellectual property. Another agreement being worked would eliminate borders similar to what the Shengen agreement did in Europe.

Its no surprise that free traders and globalists hate democracy because every time people are actually given the chance to vote on any of their projects they are told to jam them up their asses.

The NO vote in Britain is a significant victory for common sense but the slow steady march towards a global state run by corporations and bankers will continue.

We are on the same page on these last three paragraphs. Diplomats and bureaucrats love the camaraderie of the big meeting, the big agreement, and then getting smashed together and celebrating. The inconvenient fact here is that they’re supposed to represent their people. Once in a while the people do something shocking and vote the “wrong” way for them.

If the UK-EU ties made sense they’ll still happen the way the U.S. and Canada interlock. There’s no need for a super-government.

All the doom and gloom was just scare tactics by the globalist elites. The British people will survive just fine. The only people who will lose are the ones who had an investment in belonging to the EU. The EU was nothing more than a communist type of dictatorship. I only hope this Brexit will lead to the end of the EU , an unelected and an undemocratic outfit that is a danger to rights and freedom.

Congratulations. At least someone else gets it. The dictatorship was more on the lines of the old mercantalist cartels and quotas but that's a quibble.

Edited June 28, 2016 by jbg

[Wilber]

The British troops didn't fare too well against the U.S. The Canadian troops kicked our asses at Fort York (now Toronto) and other places. The British are bluff and bluster; the Canadians are quiet, effective fighters who I respect.

The Brexit vote is opposed by people who want to tell the British what's good for them. Having a massive, unelected bureaucracy running their lives gave them no benefit. Europe is in a fix; the UK will do just fine.

The Brits did very well in 1812 considering they were almost always outnumbered. Except for the Battle of Chateauguay which was won by Canadian militia, it was British regulars and their Indian allies who kicked your asses back across the Niagara and St Lawrence. North America was a sideshow for the British who were locked in a life and death struggle with Napoleon at the time.

The EU certainly has its problems but in the minds of many, this was an attempt to turn the clock back to a mythical time that never actually existed. If you look at Britain between WW1 and its entry into the EU, it wasn't anywhere near the bed of roses they would like to believe.

[Moonlight Graham]

I don't see that lowering the overall population at all.

You'd be surprised the effect of giving people machines designed to kill other people will do.

[G Huxley]

It does a lot of things, but it doesn't lower the human population.

[kimmy]

That's the kind of moronic attitude that results in these kinds of situations. The average investor and retiree is taking a much bigger hit than these billionaires. The billionaires can afford it. Those trying to live off their life's savings and investments can't. It was the so called peons who shot themselves in the foot, not the billionaires. They will come out of this just fine.

Temporary blips in stock prices happen all the time, and making long-term policy decisions based on short-term effects on stock prices doesn't make sense to me.

Stocks crashed in 2000, they recovered. They crashed in 2008, they recovered. They dipped last week, they'll recover. It sucks if you have to cash in your shares at that moment, but life is risk. Nothing is guaranteed.

Overall, these retirees you're worried about are the most prosperous group of people the earth has ever seen and ever will see. What are we really talking about here? They'll have to settle for the discount Alaska cruise instead of the deluxe Caribbean cruise this year? I don't want to sound insensitive, but who cares?

I am much more concerned for those of us who'll be working for the next 30-40 years (and those who come after) than for the momentary disappointment of those whose Freedom 55'ing has been inconvenienced.

These trade deals-- be it the European Union allowing cheap eastern European labor to come right to Britain, or NAFTA and the TPP allowing businesses even more avenues to offshore labor costs-- are primarily a coordinated attack on the value of labor. They're great for the capital class, and they're ok for people like Bonam whose skills are so highly sought and irreplaceable that offshoring is a non-issue. But for those of us who depend on labor as our sole means of earning a livelihood, they're poison. I strongly suggest that if you've decided that international agreements to undercut the value of labor in this country are a good thing because they boost your stock prices in the short term, you're thinking short term. Us lowly laborers-- whether they be Royal Bank IT workers whose jobs have been sent to India, or high-school students who have less money to save for tuition because the rubber-stamping of Temporary Foreign Workers keeps service industry wages low, or factory workers whose jobs that have gone to Mexico-- we're the ones whose tax dollars are supposed to keep this whole ship afloat. If you guys want to believe that you already got yours and your stock portfolios are what matters now, if you think cutting laborers off at the ankles in the interest of boosting your RRSP portfolios is wise, I guess that's your prerogative, but these chickens are going to come home to roost.

-k

[Smoke]

Temporary blips in stock prices happen all the time, and making long-term policy decisions based on short-term effects on stock prices doesn't make sense to me.

Stocks crashed in 2000, they recovered. They crashed in 2008, they recovered. They dipped last week, they'll recover. It sucks if you have to cash in your shares at that moment, but life is risk. Nothing is guaranteed.

Overall, these retirees you're worried about are the most prosperous group of people the earth has ever seen and ever will see. What are we really talking about here? They'll have to settle for the discount Alaska cruise instead of the deluxe Caribbean cruise this year? I don't want to sound insensitive, but who cares?

I am much more concerned for those of us who'll be working for the next 30-40 years (and those who come after) than for the momentary disappointment of those whose Freedom 55'ing has been inconvenienced.

These trade deals-- be it the European Union allowing cheap eastern European labor to come right to Britain, or NAFTA and the TPP allowing businesses even more avenues to offshore labor costs-- are primarily a coordinated attack on the value of labor. They're great for the capital class, and they're ok for people like Bonam whose skills are so highly sought and irreplaceable that offshoring is a non-issue. But for those of us who depend on labor as our sole means of earning a livelihood, they're poison. I strongly suggest that if you've decided that international agreements to undercut the value of labor in this country are a good thing because they boost your stock prices in the short term, you're thinking short term. Us lowly laborers-- whether they be Royal Bank IT workers whose jobs have been sent to India, or high-school students who have less money to save for tuition because the rubber-stamping of Temporary Foreign Workers keeps service industry wages low, or factory workers whose jobs that have gone to Mexico-- we're the ones whose tax dollars are supposed to keep this whole ship afloat. If you guys want to believe that you already got yours and your stock portfolios are what matters now, if you think cutting laborers off at the ankles in the interest of boosting your RRSP portfolios is wise, I guess that's your prerogative, but these chickens are going to come home to roost.

-k

If you're that pissed now, just wait til you're old and retired and have some youngster complaining that you are enjoying the fruits of your labor after working for them 30-40 years.

[Wilber]

Temporary blips in stock prices happen all the time, and making long-term policy decisions based on short-term effects on stock prices doesn't make sense to me.

Stocks crashed in 2000, they recovered. They crashed in 2008, they recovered. They dipped last week, they'll recover. It sucks if you have to cash in your shares at that moment, but life is risk. Nothing is guaranteed.

Overall, these retirees you're worried about are the most prosperous group of people the earth has ever seen and ever will see. What are we really talking about here? They'll have to settle for the discount Alaska cruise instead of the deluxe Caribbean cruise this year? I don't want to sound insensitive, but who cares?

Kimmy

You have made it pretty clear in the past that you don't think much of older people but one day if you are lucky you will live to retire. If you have been responsible about looking after your own future you will have accumulated assets that will allow you to live above the poverty line for the rest of your life. If the value of those assets decreases and the value of the money they are invested in also decreases, that is not a blip, it is todays reality because you have to keep withdrawing from those depleted accounts or you don't eat and the bills don't get paid. There is no waiting it out and there are no buying opportunities because to buy, you have to sell something at a devalued price to get the money. Either that or you have to sell some of your fixed income investments in order to invest in the market and assume more risk at a time in your life when that is exactly the wrong thing to do. The same goes for pension plans if you are lucky enough to have one. If the market takes a 20% hit, they can't just say sorry, no cheque for you until the market recovers.

Depending on their market exposure and with interest rates being so low, most retirees have more exposure than they would really like at their age. When you add the market losses to the devaluation of the pound, Brit retirees went to bed Friday night about 20% poorer than when they went to bed on Thursday, Their financial obligations didn't change.

Yes, there are some retirees who have done very well on property and or have good pension plans but they aren't the majority. I have a cousin who is a tax accountant and financial advisor in the Kelowna area. We were talking to her last week and one of the things she mentioned is that she has never seen so many seniors declaring bankruptcy.

[SpankyMcFarland]

Absent a Free Trade deal and access to the UK market, the German economy will tank faster than the British........simply put, the UK is one of the biggest markets of German produced consumer goods, everything from cars, kitchen appliances to electronics.

Germany looks to Asia, esp. China, more than to places like Britain to sell its goods in the future.

Britain will have to pay a price for the disruption it has caused the EU. That may affect German and other exporters to some extent but it probably will be demanded by the politicians to discourage others from similar ideas. The Brits have caused everybody considerable grief. It won't be consequence free.

[SpankyMcFarland]

All of that may be true, but none of it will make a difference to the "little man", whose supposed dissatisfaction with the "elites" triggered this whole mess.

His problems stem from the fact that his take-home percentage of the GDP has grown smaller and smaller.... and it will continue to do that whether within or without the EU.... so long as the corporate structure funnels surpluses UP to compensation for executives and shareholders.... and not DOWN to increased wages.. No major party knows how to improve that.... and even if they do, they do not have the political will.

So whether the UK tanks, or rebounds, or stays the same.... the little guy will still be no better off.

And the immigration issue is a red herring. In a "separate" UK... if the economy proves to be that much better than the rest of Europe...then people will find a way to get there, just like they have into the United States.

If the UK really wants to curb their immigration, then just tank your economy and job market.... Maybe that's exactly what they have done. Mission accomplished!

...

The larger forces at work will continue to operate within or without the EU. The great factories are not coming back.

And the NHS will continue to need workers at 3 am to clean hospitals for very modest sums. A lot of these people are not British and will not be British.

Something needed to done for what ails Britain but Brexit was the wrong treatment.

Edited June 28, 2016 by SpankyMcFarland

[eyeball]

This is a bit too simplistic. Its true that immigration was a big factor in the vote but just because someone is concerned about immigration does not mean they are racists. Further more the euro-skeptic movement in the UK has been growing for a long time... decades. And its really about the loss of sovereignty and people losing the ability to govern themselves in a national democracy.

I have a hard time imagining people actually believe the possession of these things matters much. Maybe they maintain this is a big factor but surely with their noses firmly pinched shut.

Was racism a motivation for many on the LEAVE side? Sure... but its still a lot more complicated than that.

I'm not a racist, and I'm generally in favor of letting in quite a few immigrants, but I STILL wouldnt want Canada's immigration policy to be set by a bunch of bureaucrats and bankers in another country that are not even directly accountable to Canadian voters.

I suppose this must sound ennobling to the leavists but again, they'd either have to ignore or be utterly oblivious to just how many other unaccountable things going on far outside their control that are really affecting them - like the wild borderless and seemingly lawless world that corporations and money roam at will - something their own precious and sovereign bureaucrats and bankers are just as unaccountably enabling for Christ's sake.

That immigration became such a significant concern is a crime against reason and fricken stupid voters just took out their anger and frustration on the wrong target.

[eyeball]

The idea that "the racists won" is the only reason I can imagine as to why progressives are mad about this.

Given the fall out it looks like everyone lost, which appears to be exactly what the remain side said would happen. You can't imagine that progressives might get a little exasperated after being proved right again when it comes to the stupid self-destructive things that so many right-wingers are duped into endorsing?

Makes me want to kick the crap out of something some days but I think I'm getting more resigned to it and trying to find the humour in it.

Progressives don't care about the net worth of the wealthy, or stock prices, or the ability of big corporations to find tax loopholes.

-k

ROTFLMAO!

Seriously, thanks for that.

[Smoke]

Given the fall out it looks like everyone lost, which appears to be exactly what the remain side said would happen. You can't imagine that progressives might get a little exasperated after being proved right again when it comes to the stupid self-destructive things that so many right-wingers are duped into endorsing?

Makes me want to kick the crap out of something some days but I think I'm getting more resigned to it and trying to find the humour in it.

ROTFLMAO!

Seriously, thanks for that.

So the fallout has already happened. Boy that didn't take long. You not even gonna wait and see if it's just a blip in the grand scheme of things. Poor progressives lives have been ruined....oh the humanity! BTW do you have a link that shows the remain side was "progressive" and the leave side was "right wing"? Oh and you should try to get your misplaced anger under control, especially over something that voters in another country (where you don't live) have voted on. But it does not surprise me that some "progressive" in Canada would want to have a say in what voters in another country want. Maybe the "leave" side was sick and tired of people running their lives from another country. How ironic eh?

[kactus]

So the fallout has already happened. Boy that didn't take long. You not even gonna wait and see if it's just a blip in the grand scheme of things. Poor progressives lives have been ruined....oh the humanity! BTW do you have a link that shows the remain side was "progressive" and the leave side was "right wing"? Oh and you should try to get your misplaced anger under control, especially over something that voters in another country (where you don't live) have voted on. But it does not surprise me that some "progressive" in Canada would want to have a say in what voters in another country want. Maybe the "leave" side was sick and tired of people running their lives from another country. How ironic eh?

It was quite obvious that the majority of the vote for leave camp came from Middle England! (which is tradionally a Tory stronghold) The endorsment of ultra right wings parties such as UKIP should tell you that. The majority in London, Scotland and Northern Ireland were in the remain camp. The funny thing is many of the voters in the leave camp actuall do 'regret' the decision for opting out as it was also evident in the shell shocked look of Boris Johnson after the results were announced...

But that diesn't stop the likes of Farage to give false promises over £350ml funding provided to NHS....

[Smoke]

It was quite obvious that the majority of the vote for leave camp came from Middle England! (which is tradionally a Tory stronghold) The endorsment of ultra right wings parties such as UKIP should tell you that. The majority in London, Scotland and Northern Ireland were in the remain camp. The funny thing is many of the voters in the leave camp actuall do 'regret' the decision for opting out as it was also evident in the shell shocked look of Boris Johnson after the results were announced...

But that diesn't stop the likes of Farage to give false promises over £350ml funding provided to NHS....

So no link....just your opinion then. Got it. BTW, while you're looking for that link maybe you can also find one showing that "many" of the voters in the leave camp are regretting their decision.

[TimG]

"many" of the voters in the leave camp are regretting their decision.

This is just more attempts by the 'remain' side to create the same propaganda and lies which they accuse the leave side. For every person who voted 'leave' that has second thoughts there is likely another 'remain' voter that only voted that way out of fear but is still happy that 'leave' won. But the media will not report the latter. Edited June 28, 2016 by TimG

[SpankyMcFarland]

Interesting piece from the Guardian which would have been a solidly pro-Remain paper:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/27/liverpool-london-brexit-leave-eu-referendum

[overthere]

Northern Ireland voted to stay, and could well end up wanting to join Ireland and leave the UK rather than leave the EU.

Scotland has indicated strongly that they want to remain in the EU, and may want another separation referendum soon after the Brexit vote. They have always wanted to join the EU if and when they are sovereign. Nobody wants to talk about the other side of that, which is: does the EU want Scotland? I cannot think of why they would. Does Brussels really need another 5 million people on the dole?

[TimG]

Scotland has indicated strongly that they want to remain in the EU, and may want another separation referendum soon after the Brexit vote. They have always wanted to join the EU if and when they are sovereign. Nobody wants to talk about the other side of that, which is: does the EU want Scotland? I cannot think of why they would. Does Brussels really need another 5 million people on the dole?

The Germans and French might think that immediately accepting Scotland would be a wonderful way to punish Britain. But Spain, with its Catalan region, would not be so sanguine about the precedent and I believe they have a veto under EU rules. Edited June 28, 2016 by TimG

[overthere]

Temporary blips in stock prices happen all the time, and making long-term policy decisions based on short-term effects on stock prices doesn't make sense to me.

Stocks crashed in 2000, they recovered. They crashed in 2008, they recovered. They dipped last week, they'll recover. It sucks if you have to cash in your shares at that moment, but life is risk. Nothing is guaranteed.

Overall, these retirees you're worried about are the most prosperous group of people the earth has ever seen and ever will see. What are we really talking about here? They'll have to settle for the discount Alaska cruise instead of the deluxe Caribbean cruise this year? I don't want to sound insensitive, but who cares?

I am much more concerned for those of us who'll be working for the next 30-40 years (and those who come after) than for the momentary disappointment of those whose Freedom 55'ing has been inconvenienced.

These trade deals-- be it the European Union allowing cheap eastern European labor to come right to Britain, or NAFTA and the TPP allowing businesses even more avenues to offshore labor costs-- are primarily a coordinated attack on the value of labor. They're great for the capital class, and they're ok for people like Bonam whose skills are so highly sought and irreplaceable that offshoring is a non-issue. But for those of us who depend on labor as our sole means of earning a livelihood, they're poison. I strongly suggest that if you've decided that international agreements to undercut the value of labor in this country are a good thing because they boost your stock prices in the short term, you're thinking short term. Us lowly laborers-- whether they be Royal Bank IT workers whose jobs have been sent to India, or high-school students who have less money to save for tuition because the rubber-stamping of Temporary Foreign Workers keeps service industry wages low, or factory workers whose jobs that have gone to Mexico-- we're the ones whose tax dollars are supposed to keep this whole ship afloat. If you guys want to believe that you already got yours and your stock portfolios are what matters now, if you think cutting laborers off at the ankles in the interest of boosting your RRSP portfolios is wise, I guess that's your prerogative, but these chickens are going to come home to roost.

-k

The globalization of labour may not directly benefit you, but doesn't it benefit humanity in other countries? That job sent to India certainly benefits that Indian worker and her family.

We cannot have it both ways. Are we progressive or not?

[SpankyMcFarland]

The Germans and French might think that immediately accepting Scotland would be a wonderful way to punish Britain. But Spain, with its Catalan region, would not be so sanguine about the precedent and I believe they have a veto under EU rules.

It would also be the right thing to do if the Scots wanted to remain in the EU. England outside London, and Wales, have a very different take on this matter from Scotland and NI. There is a widening chasm in the UK.

Two things stand in the way - money and Spain. Scotland is in bad shape right now with the oil collapse, and Spain wants to force Catalonia to stay.

Edited June 28, 2016 by SpankyMcFarland

[overthere]

The Germans and French might think that immediately accepting Scotland would be a wonderful way to punish Britain. But Spain, with its Catalan region, would not be so sanguine about the precedent and I believe they have a veto under EU rules.

In an economic sense, the loss of Scotland would be of benefit to England. How would that enable the EU to punish 'Britain', since Britain would be effectively extinct? It certainly would not punish England, who pour billions into support for Scotland now and in general get back overt hostility..

Down the road, it is much more likely that England would be in the EU than Scotland.

Note too that Germany has an overriding, compelling interest in a healthy EU and a moderately valued Euro. The dissolution of the EU/return to the German Mark would be utterly devastating to the German export economy. It explains why they tolerate the antics of Greece, Spain and Italy- it is still much cheaper than the alternative.

[kactus]

So no link....just your opinion then. Got it. BTW, while you're looking for that link maybe you can also find one showing that "many" of the voters in the leave camp are regretting their decision.

You want a link to prove to you that the UKIP leader is a rightwing!? That's like saying prove me it's is dark outside in daylight.

There are tons of links about leave camp regretting their decision. Google search....