
Tech developer quits UK saying Brexit has ‘killed’ his business - rbanffy
https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/10/tech-developer-quits-uk-saying-brexit-has-killed-his-business
======
dev_north_east
I'd be willing to bet his business failed and Brexit is a handy scapegoat.

Amazing that this was even published mind, there's so little here.

~~~
rurban
He named it. The pound dropped eating his margins. So he moved to a better
place with a stronger currency and culture. He will not be the only one,
almost everyone will be fleeing soon.

~~~
bobbby
He works internationally, the drop in pound means he would have been earning
more as the pound dropped. Surely he's going to have to put his prices up,
which could have been his solution anyway?

I'm sure the real reasons are political rather than financial.

~~~
profquail
He’d be earning more if paid in some other currency and spending in pounds.

He’d be earning less — as the article mentions — if earning in pounds and
paying out (to subcontractors) in other currencies.

~~~
bobbby
I don't see how changing country makes any difference? He'll have to put up
the price for his existing UK customers to cover the costs of his overseas
staff

------
ramblerman
I guess the budget ran out on this article. They really based the whole oped
on 1 guy?

~~~
lern_too_spel
The Guardian has always had lazy reporting and lax editing. The articles on
the Snowden leaks were written based on a single high school dropout's
fanciful interpretation of the documents, without any input from domain
experts.

------
jazzyk
It is sad to see what The Guardian has become.

I don't mind their leftist optics, my problem with them is that they have been
publishing unbalanced, poorly researched/uncorroborated articles.

Long way from the Guardian of the Snowden days.

~~~
lern_too_spel
> they have been publishing unbalanced, poorly researched/uncorroborated
> articles.

So exactly like The Guardian of the Snowden days, which got PRISM ridiculously
wrong by not interviewing anybody who had a clue. Worse, they never issued a
correction, instead doubling down on the original story.

------
usedtoprogram
So, essentially came to the UK to be prosperous. At the first hint of
potential harder times he leaves, rather than try harder to contribute.
Brilliant...

------
thedevindevops
Scotland. Northern Ireland. Wales. Did the lower operational costs and anti-
Brexit sentiment of these regions not occur to him or did journalistic bias
force the author to write 'UK' rather than 'London'?

~~~
jjgreen
Wales voted to leave by about the (UK) national margin.

~~~
newsgremlin
It's beggars belief, they have the lowest immigration numbers of all the UK
and some of the most funding from the EU.

~~~
Aromasin
Disinformation was rampant in Wales. Many of my Welsh friends were aware of
massive ad campaigns from the Leave campaign in their areas.

A good few places in Wales are struggling under the current government
austerity, and blaming the EU was an easy scapegoat to sell to the
misinformed.

~~~
mcv
Disinformation was rampant in England too. British tabloids have a long
history of blaming the EU for the weirdest made-up stuff, as well as for
unpopular laws from the UK government, while the government loves to take
credit for popular measures from the EU.

~~~
yostrovs
Contrary to the disinformation campaign, the British people chose what they
thought is best for them. I'm just glad that democracy is strong and respected
there.

~~~
mcv
Well, yes and no. It's certainly better than some places, but it's clearly
very vulnerable to disinformation campaigns, and the government's
unwillingness to put this to a vote is causing chaos. It appears a small group
has used the situation to take control of the future of the country and steer
it into a direction nobody wants, and is now denying the people a vote on the
mess they're making.

~~~
yostrovs
The people already voted. There was a clear understanding that that vote was
the one and only. There wouldn't be a vote at every step. Britain is a
representative democracy and the representatives deal with the details.

~~~
mcv
There was not a clear understanding what the vote was about. There
contradictory promises being made about what a Brexit would mean. It would
mean saving tons of money that wasn't there, staying in the common market for
goods and services, yet somehow leaving the common market for labour, except
maybe not when it benefitted Brits. The whole campaign was a bunch of lies,
and those lies are what informed the people's vote.

There was absolutely nothing clear about what a Leave vote would actually
mean. It makes every sense in the world to hold a new, more honest vote once
that has become clear. It's a betrayal of democracy to plunge the country into
such an ill-advised and irreversible direction based on a single, poorly
defined and poorly informed vote.

