NationStates

New Valmyria wrote:If they all got their way, the UK could be reduced to England, Cardiff, Pembrokeshire and Belfast...

Well, chances are London would pull a Cocknexit from UK too.

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

I have supported Scottish independence and irish unification long before voting leave. They are not a downside for me.
I have never been swayed by economic arguments, so that's not really a major factor for me either.
Eh...our political situation is already a shithole, not seing a major change.

Personally, I see the benefits of Brexit as being able to have better trading and cooperative relations with markets that are actually growing, not being shackled to 27 other countries whose politics may be very different from our own, being outside of the European arrest warrant, having the right to spend more of our money on the things we decide are important, not being bound by ECJ rulings, reclaiming our fishing and agricultural policies, and not being bound by EU climate change obligations. More will come to me, I'm sure.

Edit: One big one did. Not being bound by EU data sharing agreements. Don't expect it's a reason many others care about, but it's quite a biggy for me.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

I have supported Scottish independence and irish unification long before voting leave. They are not a downside for me.
(1) I have never been swayed by economic arguments, so that's not really a major factor for me either.
Eh...our political situation is already a shithole, not seing a major change.

Personally, I see the benefits of Brexit as being able to have (2) better trading and cooperative relations with markets that are actually growing, not being shackled to 27 other countries whose politics may be very different from our own, being (3) outside of the European arrest warrant, (4) having the right to spend more of our money on the things we decide are important, (5) not being bound by ECJ rulings, (6) reclaiming our fishing and agricultural policies, and not being bound by (7) EU climate change obligations. More will come to me, I'm sure.

Edit: One big one did. Not being bound by EU data sharing agreements. Don't expect it's a reason many others care about, but it's quite a biggy for me.

1. You might not be swayed by economic arguments, but the economy is quite important to a country, you know.
2. Britain on its own will not be able to negotiate trade agreements that are as favourable as the EU can negotiate them, just by virtue of being a smaller economic block. Not being part of the 28 member block just means that you have to bow down to parties like the US or China, or the EU if Britain decides it wants to trade with us. Because if Britain wants to export goods to the EU, those goods will have to live up to EU standards. This will come back in a bit. Mind, you're making an economic argument now, which supposedly didn't matter to you.
3. The UK will still have extradition treaties with all EU countries, no matter if the UK is inside or outside the EU.
4. The UK has that right. It spends a tiny fraction of its budget on the EU. This argument also works for abolishing public education, by the way. "We are now shackled by those insidious, tyrannical schools imposing their budget requirements on us!" No, it's just one way to spend money. By the way, the UK makes that money back through its economy.
5. Name an ECJ ruling that you disagree with. Name one, with the reason why you dislike it. Or you know what, name me a ECJ ruling by name. Of course, the UK will still be bound by those rulings in practice if they want to continue trading with the EU.
6. Agricultural policy is in the hands of the member states, and Britain has thus far voted in favour of every fishery regulation there is.
7. What EU climate change obligation? The EU has thus far imposed no obligations regarding climate change on the members...

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

I have supported Scottish independence and irish unification long before voting leave. They are not a downside for me.
I have never been swayed by economic arguments, so that's not really a major factor for me either.
Eh...our political situation is already a shithole, not seing a major change.

Personally, I see the benefits of Brexit as being able to have better trading and cooperative relations with markets that are actually growing, not being shackled to 27 other countries whose politics may be very different from our own, being outside of the European arrest warrant, having the right to spend more of our money on the things we decide are important, not being bound by ECJ rulings, reclaiming our fishing and agricultural policies, and not being bound by EU climate change obligations. More will come to me, I'm sure.

Edit: One big one did. Not being bound by EU data sharing agreements. Don't expect it's a reason many others care about, but it's quite a biggy for me.

So basically your reasons for voting leave are based on an utter utter fantasy.

Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:I have supported Scottish independence and irish unification long before voting leave. They are not a downside for me.
(1) I have never been swayed by economic arguments, so that's not really a major factor for me either.
Eh...our political situation is already a shithole, not seing a major change.

Personally, I see the benefits of Brexit as being able to have (2) better trading and cooperative relations with markets that are actually growing, not being shackled to 27 other countries whose politics may be very different from our own, being (3) outside of the European arrest warrant, (4) having the right to spend more of our money on the things we decide are important, (5) not being bound by ECJ rulings, (6) reclaiming our fishing and agricultural policies, and not being bound by (7) EU climate change obligations. More will come to me, I'm sure.

Edit: One big one did. Not being bound by EU data sharing agreements. Don't expect it's a reason many others care about, but it's quite a biggy for me.

1. You might not be swayed by economic arguments, but the economy is quite important to a country, you know.
2. Britain on its own will not be able to negotiate trade agreements that are as favourable as the EU can negotiate them, just by virtue of being a smaller economic block. Not being part of the 28 member block just means that you have to bow down to parties like the US or China, or the EU if Britain decides it wants to trade with us. Because if Britain wants to export goods to the EU, those goods will have to live up to EU standards. This will come back in a bit. Mind, you're making an economic argument now, which supposedly didn't matter to you.
3. The UK will still have extradition treaties with all EU countries, no matter if the UK is inside or outside the EU.
4. The UK has that right. It spends a tiny fraction of its budget on the EU. This argument also works for abolishing public education, by the way. "We are now shackled by those insidious, tyrannical schools imposing their budget requirements on us!" No, it's just one way to spend money. By the way, the UK makes that money back through its economy.
5. Name an ECJ ruling that you disagree with. Name one, with the reason why you dislike it. Or you know what, name me a ECJ ruling by name. Of course, the UK will still be bound by those rulings in practice if they want to continue trading with the EU.
6. Agricultural policy is in the hands of the member states, and Britain has thus far voted in favour of every fishery regulation there is.
7. What EU climate change obligation? The EU has thus far imposed no obligations regarding climate change on the members...

Which area of EU law would you like discussing? I probably know more about the subject than you would presume, although I admit I only received confirmation of my law degree yesterday.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

I have supported Scottish independence and irish unification long before voting leave. They are not a downside for me.
I have never been swayed by economic arguments, so that's not really a major factor for me either.
Eh...our political situation is already a shithole, not seing a major change.

Personally, I see the benefits of Brexit as being able to have better trading and cooperative relations with markets that are actually growing, not being shackled to 27 other countries whose politics may be very different from our own, being outside of the European arrest warrant, having the right to spend more of our money on the things we decide are important, not being bound by ECJ rulings, reclaiming our fishing and agricultural policies, and not being bound by EU climate change obligations. More will come to me, I'm sure.

Edit: One big one did. Not being bound by EU data sharing agreements. Don't expect it's a reason many others care about, but it's quite a biggy for me.

We were already able to trade with other nations, and other nations preferred trading with the UK as part of the EU.
Now businesses are leaving the UK due to Brexit.
Not to mention, the UK will spend more money on independent trade deals than trade deals as part f the EU.

The European Arrest Warrants, according to the Commissioner of the Met, not to mention several UK policing experts, are necessary. They have stated being outside the EAW would be damaging for policing.

We were already able to spend money on what we decided what was important. In fact, several UK areas, including my home town, are under the EU Development Scheme due to how run down they are. That funding from the EU (which the UK government does not care about) keeps youth centres, libraries, community centres, and so much more open.

The ECJ laws were written mostly by British Law Makers, and if it was not for the ECJ, the Bedroom tax would still be enforced.

You mean how Nigel Farage was member of the EU Parliamentary Committee for Agriculture and Fisheries, and only attended 1 out of 43 meetings to discuss UK fishing rights?
According to most farmers and fisheries, they rely on exporting their produce to the EU. So leaving the EU would be damaging to UK fisheries. Not to mention, UK fisheries, especially in the south, over-fish and not allow the fish to reproduce, which is why the EU tried to regulate UK fisheries

Climate change regulations are highly necessary, especially now more than ever.

Celritannia wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:I have supported Scottish independence and irish unification long before voting leave. They are not a downside for me.
I have never been swayed by economic arguments, so that's not really a major factor for me either.
Eh...our political situation is already a shithole, not seing a major change.

Personally, I see the benefits of Brexit as being able to have better trading and cooperative relations with markets that are actually growing, not being shackled to 27 other countries whose politics may be very different from our own, being outside of the European arrest warrant, having the right to spend more of our money on the things we decide are important, not being bound by ECJ rulings, reclaiming our fishing and agricultural policies, and not being bound by EU climate change obligations. More will come to me, I'm sure.

Edit: One big one did. Not being bound by EU data sharing agreements. Don't expect it's a reason many others care about, but it's quite a biggy for me.

We were already able to trade with other nations, and other nations preferred trading with the UK as part of the EU.
Now businesses are leaving the UK due to Brexit.
Not to mention, the UK will spend more money on independent trade deals than trade deals as part f the EU.

The European Arrest Warrants, according to the Commissioner of the Met, not to mention several UK policing experts, are necessary. They have stated being outside the EAW would be damaging for policing.

We were already able to spend money on what we decided what was important. In fact, several UK areas, including my home town, are under the EU Development Scheme due to how run down they are. That funding from the EU (which the UK government does not care about) keeps youth centres, libraries, community centres, and so much more open.

The ECJ laws were written mostly by British Law Makers, and if it was not for the ECJ, the Bedroom tax would still be enforced.

You mean how Nigel Farage was member of the EU Parliamentary Committee for Agriculture and Fisheries, and only attended 1 out of 43 meetings to discuss UK fishing rights?
According to most farmers and fisheries, they rely on exporting their produce to the EU. So leaving the EU would be damaging to UK fisheries. Not to mention, UK fisheries, especially in the south, over-fish and not allow the fish to reproduce, which is why the EU tried to regulate UK fisheries

Climate change regulations are highly necessary, especially now more than ever.

I'm not concerned about whether business want to keep their hqs here, I'm more interested in whether a better selection of goods is available for british consumers.

If you tell me something would be 'bad for policing,' you're effectively telling me 'it's good for liberty.' I don't want more police powers, thank you, I want less of them.

What the UK decided is important obviously wasn't your local area then, was it? We shouldn't be forced to spend money on an area we don't believe is important.
The ECJ laws are judgements, not laws, and they are written by judges, not lawmakers. The ECJ has supremacy over our own courts, meaning that European laws have to be applied in british courts; most of these judgements were not written by British lawmakers, and even if they were it would not matter as they were being written for a legal system which is not our own. You may as well argue that we should keep to a particular piece of hong kong law because it was written by a retired UK supreme court judge.

Why do the vast majority of UK fishermen wish to leave the EU then? Does the EU know what is better for them and their communities than they do themselves?

Climate change is a threat, but not the biggest one at the moment. We don't need to focus on it.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
We were already able to trade with other nations, and other nations preferred trading with the UK as part of the EU.
Now businesses are leaving the UK due to Brexit.
Not to mention, the UK will spend more money on independent trade deals than trade deals as part f the EU.

The European Arrest Warrants, according to the Commissioner of the Met, not to mention several UK policing experts, are necessary. They have stated being outside the EAW would be damaging for policing.

We were already able to spend money on what we decided what was important. In fact, several UK areas, including my home town, are under the EU Development Scheme due to how run down they are. That funding from the EU (which the UK government does not care about) keeps youth centres, libraries, community centres, and so much more open.

The ECJ laws were written mostly by British Law Makers, and if it was not for the ECJ, the Bedroom tax would still be enforced.

You mean how Nigel Farage was member of the EU Parliamentary Committee for Agriculture and Fisheries, and only attended 1 out of 43 meetings to discuss UK fishing rights?
According to most farmers and fisheries, they rely on exporting their produce to the EU. So leaving the EU would be damaging to UK fisheries. Not to mention, UK fisheries, especially in the south, over-fish and not allow the fish to reproduce, which is why the EU tried to regulate UK fisheries

Climate change regulations are highly necessary, especially now more than ever.

I'm not concerned about whether business want to keep their hqs here, I'm more interested in whether a better selection of goods is available for british consumers.

If you tell me something would be 'bad for policing,' you're effectively telling me 'it's good for liberty.' I don't want more police powers, thank you, I want less of them.

What the UK decided is important obviously wasn't your local area then, was it? We shouldn't be forced to spend money on an area we don't believe is important.
The ECJ laws are judgements, not laws, and they are written by judges, not lawmakers. The ECJ has supremacy over our own courts, meaning that European laws have to be applied in british courts; most of these judgements were not written by British lawmakers, and even if they were it would not matter as they were being written for a legal system which is not our own. You may as well argue that we should keep to a particular piece of hong kong law because it was written by a retired UK supreme court judge.

Why do the vast majority of UK fishermen wish to leave the EU then? Does the EU know what is better for them and their communities than they do themselves?

Climate change is a threat, but not the biggest one at the moment. We don't need to focus on it.

Which will not happen without Businesses investing time into the UK, creating jobs, and allowing better products on the market.

So you want more knife crime?
Now I know what side you're on.

Every part of the UK matters. the UK government does not care about any place outside of London. More regions of the UK are part of the EU Development Area than the UK Government actually gives money to local councils.
For a more productive society, you put money int all local councils, that is what should happen.

So you do not agree with the ECJ overturning the Bedroom Tax bill?
Correction the Bedroom Tax was overturned by the European Court of Human Rights.
However, the ECJ cannot make any rulings on national law, which is what you are saying it does. It cannot.
As stated:

The ECJ is the highest court of the European Union in matters of Union law, but not national law.

Brexit does not seem to be helping UK fisheries:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ndustry-eu
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... -stalemate
The EU is not a single entity, all EU nations come together to discuss various topics, including fishing policies.
Perhaps you should look at this before spout "But our fishing waters".

Climate change is a massive threat to the entire planet. There is no greater threat.

What a fool I was. I was only a puppet, and so was Ulster, and so was Ireland, in the political game that was to get the Conservative Party into power

Apt quote at the moment in my opinion

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

I have supported Scottish independence and irish unification long before voting leave. They are not a downside for me.
I have never been swayed by economic arguments, so that's not really a major factor for me either.
Eh...our political situation is already a shithole, not seing a major change.

Personally, I see the benefits of Brexit as being able to have better trading and cooperative relations with markets that are actually growing,

Not going to happen.

being outside of the European arrest warrant,

Unambiguously bad.

having the right to spend more of our money on the things we decide are important,

Not gonna happen.

not being bound by ECJ rulings,

Bad.

reclaiming our fishing and agricultural policies,

We never lost them: we copied them to the EU.

and not being bound by EU climate change obligations.

Apart from being a bad thing, this isn't true: we're already bound to significantly stronger obligations than the EU, and that isn't changing ever.

Edit: One big one did. Not being bound by EU data sharing agreements. Don't expect it's a reason many others care about, but it's quite a biggy for me.

The Data Protection Act 2018 enshrines EU data law into UK law, and isn't going anywhere.

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

It's not like these things are an inherent outcome of leaving the European Union, as much as hardline remainers would like to persuade us so. It's the way Brexit has been implemented that has made the process such a catastrophe, and that's partially down to people like you refusing any kind of compromise that could result in an orderly exit in favour of holding out for a second referendum.

Old Tyrannia wrote:

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

It's not like these things are an inherent outcome of leaving the European Union, as much as hardline remainers would like to persuade us so. It's the way Brexit has been implemented that has made the process such a catastrophe, and that's partially down to people like you refusing any kind of compromise that could result in an orderly exit in favour of holding out for a second referendum.

On the contrary, the EU has offered the UK every possible option, and the UK government refused.
Remainers are not part of the UK Government, Remainers as not part of the negotiation team.

So saying "it is the remainers fault" is incorrect on every level.

But we must remember, vote leave did lie, they made false porpoises, and 3 years on, no one has an idea on what Brexit means. This means the referendum was undemocratic (I mean, it was an advisory referendum after all).

Experts before and during the referendum pointed out concerns, and those concerns came true, including the drop in the economy, buinsesses leaving, prices increasing.

There will never be an orderly exit from the EU.
The civil service in the Department for Exiting the European Union are stressing out as they have no idea how it is achievable.
Not even anyone in leadership of the Tory party knows how to exit the EU.

Only those that still think is is possible to leave orderly are living in a fantasy.

Old Tyrannia wrote:

Duhon wrote:Might as well ask this one.

So for those who want Brexit (or plain Exit as the case will be if you keep on tearing your own country apart): what positive do you get from this? You lose Scotland and Northern Ireland, even possibly Wales, your economy craters, your political system descends into a shithole.

Other than the "sovereignty" snake oil, what is there for you to get?

It's not like these things are an inherent outcome of leaving the European Union, as much as hardline remainers would like to persuade us so. It's the way Brexit has been implemented that has made the process such a catastrophe, and that's partially down to people like you refusing any kind of compromise that could result in an orderly exit in favour of holding out for a second referendum.

Sure, if we'd come up with a coherent exit process three years ago (say, a transfer to one of the various EU-peripheral statuses), then that could have been avoided. From the moment the referendum results were in, though, this catastrophe has been utterly and completely inevitable.


And the people refusing to compromise are the brexiteers in parliament: notice the compromise deal that they rejected three fucking times.

It would probably be a good idea to raise taxes on the rich and big business to help pay for the inevitable complications related to Brexit.

Bienenhalde wrote:It would probably be a good idea to raise taxes on the rich and big business to help pay for the inevitable complications related to Brexit.

Not happening. Boris already said he wants to use Brexit to fund a big tax cut for the wealthy.

Why do the vast majority of UK fishermen wish to leave the EU then? Does the EU know what is better for them and their communities than they do themselves?

firstly, fisherman are getting fucked over. they're not getting what they wanted from leaving the EU. the are just yet another group that were promised the world by brexit and got a shitty inflatable globe sent to them royal mail 2nd class.

secondly, almost no one actually cares about fishermen. UKIP famously got into one of the EU fisheries commissions and turned up to like 1 out of 40 meetings. they are just a convenient political tool for eurosceptics that will be abandoned as soon as it is convenient (see above).

thirdly, yes. fishing requires international cooperation because fish do not give a shit about national borders. the regulations are there for a reason. while they are not perfect, scrapping them and letting every nation overfish to their hearts content until the stocks of fish disappear is not the correct solution.

Old Tyrannia wrote:, and that's partially down to people like you refusing any kind of compromise that could result in an orderly exit in favour of holding out for a second referendum

brexiters would have gotten EEA or EFTA if they asked for it. they didn't in favour of holding out for their own personal brexit.

It's the way Brexit has been implemented that has made the process such a catastrophe

the only brexit that solves these issues is an EEA or EFTA brexit, and those were taken off the table by a tory government pursuing a hard brexit agenda. what the so-called hardline remainers you're talking about did or did not do means almost nothing, because they were systematically excluded from almost all aspects of the decision making process years ago. even if they had gotten down on their knees and begged for the compromise you want to see, it would have meant nothing because the hard brexiters run the show and they were definitively not willing to compromise. while it's technically true that 5%-10% of the blame technically counts as "partially", it's sill a rather odd phrasing.

Jeremy Hunt said he would bring the DUP with him to negotiations in brussels.





Like seriously what fucking negotiations are they going to? You already have your deal with the EU, take it or fuck off. And secondly, you are gona bring the DUP? The party infamous for refusing to work with others and offer concessions, and when they do end up working with others, doing every cunt thing they possibly could cunt to fuck over the people they are working with because they are soo fucking bitter and bigoted towards anyone other than them>? The same party that has held the reins for your government for the last few years and repeatedly threatened to bring it down if they dont get what they want?


Why are the Tory candidates absolute detached cunts, why is that?

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Jeremy Hunt said he would bring the DUP with him to negotiations in brussels.


(Image)

Michel Barnier on seeing the DUP walking into the room. "Hand me the black cap, I'll be needing that later...".

Fartsniffage wrote:

The Huskar Social Union wrote:Jeremy Hunt said he would bring the DUP with him to negotiations in brussels.


(Image)

Michel Barnier on seeing the DUP walking into the room. "Hand me the black cap, I'll be needing that later...".

I think it would be hilarious if there were absolutely nobody, not even tumbleweed to receive these English "negotiators" in Brussels.

Boris Johnson also takes cannabis apparently:

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14467 ... -cannabis/

The World Capitalist Confederation wrote:Boris Johnson also takes cannabis apparently:

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14467 ... -cannabis/

Exotic Cheroot. Use the proper terminology.

The World Capitalist Confederation wrote:Boris Johnson also takes cannabis apparently:

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14467 ... -cannabis/

"I tried it (cocaine) at university and I remember it vividly. It achieved no pharmacological, psychotropic or any other effect on me whatsoever."

So Boris snorted a line of flour.

Ifreann wrote:

The World Capitalist Confederation wrote:Boris Johnson also takes cannabis apparently:

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14467 ... -cannabis/

"I tried it (cocaine) at university and I remember it vividly. It achieved no pharmacological, psychotropic or any other effect on me whatsoever."

So Boris snorted a line of flour.

Apparently it made him sneeze so he didn't get the hit.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Ifreann wrote:
So Boris snorted a line of flour.

Apparently it made him sneeze so he didn't get the hit.

Flour cut with pepper.

Ifreann wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
Apparently it made him sneeze so he didn't get the hit.

Flour cut with pepper.

Cinnamon challenge?