
UK triggers the official Brexit process in a letter to EU - nedsma
http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-39424391
======
ealexhudson
I'm a big believer in not having assumptions and testing things with actual
experiments. This is one experiment I'd rather not be participating in,
though.

It's difficult to see very much positive about this move; certainly there will
be some benefits, but I expect greatly outweighed by the negatives (which will
include higher prices, lower employment and probably lower standards for UK
workers - the EU has consistently been the only organisation willing to drag
us out of the dark ages).

~~~
ForRealsies
The EU is a novelty in human history. The desire for independence, for better
or worse, is human nature.

~~~
fredley
Independence from what? Should England be an Independent state? London? The
City of London?

~~~
dalore
Each British homeowner should be independent. A man's house is his castle. The
could all be lords of their own empire but band together when needed to fight
common enemies. Perhaps they could all group together money to help pay for
common services like roads etc.

~~~
matt4077
I had to check your history to see if this is satire.

Since it's not: this is a completely misguided view of human nature. Humans
are among the most social of all animals, and our successes and failures have
always been a function of our ability to work together. Humans everywhere, and
at any time, have created groups held together by a lot more than
transactional opportunities.

And even if you were right, and it is our fundamental nature to be lone wolfs,
plundering the lesser lords and raping their ladies: the actual overarching
feature of humanity is our unique ability to overcome base instincts with
reason and morality. And both reason and experience tell us that cooperation
is much more successful as a strategy for anything you could possibly desire
than the alternatives.

~~~
dalore
Why wouldn't you think it was satire?

------
dustinmoris
I'm a bit tired of reading doomsday messages by now. I am an European living
and working in the UK and even though this affects me I have no reason to
believe that things will go downwards now. If there's anything I've learned so
far then that every analysis I've read couldn't have been more wrong.

It almost seems like the more the UK economy doesn't collapse the more people
shout even louder how bad the Brexit is. Maybe I am just too indifferent or
chilled, but I think the best is to just sit back and watch what will happen.

Also I seriously don't think of the Brexit that the UK leaves Europe. I think
the UK and the EU will strive for the closest relationship possible. The only
thing that I see changing is that the UK withdraws from a formal contract with
the EU with the hope to negotiate a better deal. I don't think this is racist.
Not every contract makes the same sense for every country in the world.

\--- EDIT:

Wow lots of responses to this comment. Thank you all. There's a lot of good
discussion and some suggest that I am more relaxed perhaps because I am maybe
financially secure, but that is not true. When I was a child I watched on
television the Fukushima disaster in Japan and I was totally freaked out. I
was afraid for many reasons and then as I watched longer I was totally amazed
how relaxed the people in Japan dealt with the situation. There was a crisis,
but nowhere near what I thought would have happened in the western world.
Nobody was running or fleeing the country, nobody stopped going to work, etc.
People worked together to fix the problem as good as they could and everyone
lifted their weight. All news in Europe were talking about how cool-headed the
Japanese dealt with this situation and it was something which I never forgot
in my life. I then realised that only because everyone stayed calm and cool
headed they were able to deal with this problem the way they did. It was not
perfect, but boy it was much better than what I thought would happen.

So this is my childhood experience which has marked me for life and made me
realise that mass hysteria is never good. No matter what the situation is.

~~~
JamesMcMinn
You haven't been affected by the changes because nothing has happened yet.
This is the start of the negotiations to decide what those changes will be.

And when I say nothing has happened yet, I mean apart from the massive drop in
the value of sterling and inflation massively outstripping wage increases.

I assume you're based in London, which means you're fairly isolated from the
social changes that have happened across the UK in recent years. London is
very pro-EU and immigration friendly. The statistics do show a massive
increase in race related hate crimes in the UK since the referendum, so even
if the vote wasn't racist, it has given racists a confidence boost.

~~~
cmdkeen
Except "the experts" were predicting terrible things immediately, not later on
- remember the punishment budget necessity? Inflation "massively outstripping
wages" is just over the Bank of England's target, the one it has been
massively under for the past 5 years. The drop in sterling doesn't lead to
sustained inflationary pressure. Wages are also picking up as well, though not
in the public sector.

The "massive increase in race related crime" is also far more complex than
newspaper headlines give credit to. The big headlines came from the immediate
aftermath 4 days where crimes reported to a website went from 54 to to 85 -
i.e. 57%. The police statement on this made the point that it was only a
single source that they weren't seeing an increase in community tension -
guess what the press went with? The police statistics do bear out an overall
increase since the previous year, but by a much lower margin - and in line
with year on year increases.

The key point though is that in the UK hate crimes are defined as when the
victim, or any other person, perceives a crime to be a hate crime - thanks to
the legacy of Macpherson. Reported hate crimes have been trending up for
years, partly because there has been a massive cultural shift in the police to
record them and on people to report them. So, as with all statistics, it is
complicated - did more people perceive an increase in hate crimes because they
were being told that they were spiking? Has Britain become a more intolerant
place or are we just recording better how intolerant we've been for a while?
The Civitas report on this makes for interesting reading
[http://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/hatecrimethefactsbeh...](http://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/hatecrimethefactsbehindtheheadlines.pdf)

~~~
JamesMcMinn
> Except "the experts" were predicting terrible things immediately, not later
> on - remember the punishment budget necessity?

As a matter of fact, I do remember the "punishment budget", the one which was
mocked up for 2019-20 [1], around the time that the UK would actually leave
the EU.

No one expected the UK economy to crash the day of the referendum. The
projections are all projections for AFTER we have left the EU, not before. The
reason exports get that title is because they know enough to at least make
their projections from when the changes actually happen.

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/15/revolt-
of-6...](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/15/revolt-of-65-tory-
mps-over-osborne-tax-rises)

~~~
cmdkeen
The language around the budget was "emergency" and "in the event of a vote to
leave". You are correct the IFS analysis was about post leaving the EU, that
was certainly not the spin the remain campaign placed on it.

Saying "no one expected the UK economy to crash the day of" is a little odd -
the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee certainly seemed to think they
needed to act in the immediate aftermath of the vote with the interest rate
cut which is now looking not such a great idea.

~~~
vidarh
Remember that we had a prime minister that lied and said he'd invoke Article
50 immediately?

All the predictions were based on a bunch of promises by certain people to
make rash, idiotic changes immediatly after the vote. Promises that were
thankfully broken.

Most of the conditions that these kind of predictions were made under changed
the moment Cameron resigned.

------
djaychela
I sincerely hope that today (and obviously the day it actually happens) isn't
something that I look back on with sadness in the future. I live in the UK,
and am really saddened by the way that politics is 'progressing' \- in fact,
regressing to a time where nationalism seems to be the voice, and one which I
think will inevitably lead to conflict. Combined with the Trump situation in
the USA, I am extremely pessimistic about the future - more so of my four step
children, who are all going to reap the adult world that people such as
Johnson, Gove and Farage have sewn.

~~~
adnam
We had plenty of conflict while part of the EU: the Falklands, Iraq, the IRA,
Bosnia for example.

It wasn't nationalism which caused conflicts in Europe, it was a lack of
democracy.

~~~
themihai
Well, you didn't see a war between Germany and England though... Bosnia, Iraq
etc were not part of the EU. The point was to create a closely integrated
Europe so that war would become unthinkable just like a war between England
and Scotland is unthinkable now. Of course it was nationalism which caused
conflicts in Europe. Did democracy prevent Russia to invade Ukraine? UK simply
decided the European project is not worth it and they are better off trading
as an independent country than part of a european family. This may prove true
but we will have to see and for how long. If the EU reforms and sticks
together I fail to see how leaving it is a good choice. I hope this will make
EU stronger and more competitive as UK will force their hand to do more.

~~~
cmdkeen
I'd argue we didn't see a war between Germany and England, or Britain as we
are these days, as we were occupying them in the aftermath until 1949 and
maintained a British Army of the Rhine there until 1994. The Allies also
established a new Constitution and political consensus that is vehemently
anti-war - witness German reluctance to be involved in fighting in recent NATO
and other coalition conflicts.

There's also the small matter that the Russians were effectively still
occupying half of Germany until the late 1980s. The origins of the EU came
that trade prevents wars. The Democratic Peace Thesis likes to discount all
sorts of countries as "not a democracy", a good example of No True Scotsman.
Given we're seeing Turkey rapidly heading towards dictatorship, Hungary's far
right leadership despite being an EU member, and all the problems the US is
going through it is a salient reminder that just because you are a democracy
doesn't mean you stay one. One of the pretty unique things about the UK in the
EU is its political history - France is on its 5th Republic, Germany has only
been reunified within living memory, Italy's system is from 1946 etc. You can
see how relatively new, potentially fragile systems of Government might want
to prevent resurgences of problems, especially under the shadow of the Cold
War.

Edit to add: Oh - there's also this thing called NATO as well. When two
countries are in a military alliance they also tend to avoid going to war with
each other. NATO is of course also the body that intervened far more
decisively than the EU in the Bosnian and Kosovan Wars - those pesky examples
of genocide in Europe that people overlook about how fantastic and peaceful we
are as a continent.

~~~
themihai
A military alliance (such NATO) alone cannot prevent war between its members.
The recent events(Trump threating to pull U.S. support or Turkey's behaviour)
proves how fragile a such alliance is. I wouldn't be surprised to see Turkey
leaving NATO and join an alliance with Russia.

If a member decides that the alliance doesn't serve its national interests
anymore nothing can stop it from leaving and joining a different alliance.

The point of EU was to make european interests indistingusible from national
interests. It seems it hit a brick wall on UK.

~~~
ed_balls
After Turkey shot their plane?

~~~
themihai
I think they already settled that.

------
maaaats
Whatever one may think of the politics or if one's country should join/leave,
it's absolutely true that EU has been a big factor in keeping the peace
between European nations for decades. The Nobel Peace Prize to EU got a lot of
criticism because of politics, but I think it was important to show that EU
has helped keep the peace.

~~~
danielvf
I know there has been intra-nation peace in western Europe since the end of
WWII, but how do we know it was due to the EU?

Both the peace and the EU would seem to as easily explained by the post war
situation where European nations were now second tier economicly, and
threatened by a big external nation. The reward for war was no longer there,
and the need for cooperation was high.

~~~
sgift
All of your points also existed before the second world war. Russia was
already a big empire, other big empires existed throughout the history of
Europe. That never stopped European countries from attacking each other.
Basically, almost everything else has staid the same, the only change was the
EU and its predecessors came into existence after WW2. That's certainly not a
proof (it's impossible to proof such thins without a alternative-history-
viewer-machine, which hasn't been developed so far) but it is a very strong
hint.

~~~
danielvf
I don't think either one of those was true after after WW1.

Russia, though large, was not regarded as a serious military threat to Europe.
When attacked by Russia, Poland (!) beat Russia in the 1920's and gained half
of the Ukraine and half of Belarus in the subsequent peace treaty.

An although a European nation was no longer the world largest economy, they
were still regarded as the powers that mattered. The Washington Naval Treaty
on arms control between the wars even gave the US a ship allocation on par
with a European nation.

The world at the time still revolved around Europe and the actions of European
powers. To be premininet in Europe was to lead the world.

------
Two9A
Are British HN'ers taking any mitigating steps due to this whole situation?

I'm currently in the process of incorporating in the Netherlands, and it turns
out setting up a Ltd is a lot more expensive over there than in the UK. I just
don't feel that the UK will make good use of my tax receipts any more, so I'm
almost obligated to take my work elsewhere.

~~~
Doctor_Fegg
> Are British HN'ers taking any mitigating steps due to this whole situation?

Campaigning for the Liberal Democrats.

~~~
fredley
If only there was a snowball's chance in hell of this achieving something.
(disclosure: party member)

~~~
chillydawg
indeed, but NOT campaigning is guaranteeing party death (disclosure: party
member). The lib dems are pretty useless right now, but they may have a big
swing next election and they need keeping alive until then. Generally, they're
the only sane party. Mostly because it's easy to have ideals when you're not
in power.

~~~
gpvos
It's really sad that the Brits didn't succeed in getting rid of the first-
past-the-post system. Here in the Netherlands with our somewhat extreme
version of proportional representation we still have similar problems, but
they seem to be much less than over there.

~~~
tomtoise
We didn't have a chance at PR. Highly emotive[1] and ridiculous[2] campaigning
from the No side saw to that, much in the same way as it saw to Brexit.

[1][https://static.guim.co.uk/sys-
images/Admin/BkFill/Default_im...](https://static.guim.co.uk/sys-
images/Admin/BkFill/Default_image_group/2011/2/25/1298628970292/no-to-av-baby-
campaign-005.jpg)

[2][http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SkJXglPtoq0/TW6vXWrtyuI/AAAAAAAADO...](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-SkJXglPtoq0/TW6vXWrtyuI/AAAAAAAADOQ/zktt-
bbalH4/s1600/Say%2Bno%2Bto%2Bthe%2BAlternative%2BVote%2Bposter%2BHyde%2BTameside.jpg)

------
te_chris
Today is the day that David Cameron's legacy is solidified: The hubristic toff
who saw his nation as a play thing.

~~~
csmattryder
He gambled 64 million people's livelihoods to defend his party against
another, that right now, doesn't even have a sitting MP (for those outside the
UK, that's the UK Independence Party).

There's tables at Vegas that haven't seen that level of loss.

~~~
dev_head_up
> oesn't even have a sitting MP

While technically true, that's deliberately misleading to those not familiar
with the UK. That party got 3,881,099 votes (12.7% of all, making them the
third biggest in results) but the craziness of the First Past The Post meant
that didn't translate to seats.

~~~
caf
While FPTP is responsible for its own share of distortions, in this case it's
the use of Single Member Electorates that was the primary cause of UKIPs poor
seat-for-vote return.

For example, something very similar happened in the last Australian Federal
election, which _doesn 't_ use FPTP (it uses full preferential voting) but
does also use Single Member Electorates: The Greens got 1,385,650 first
preference votes, also making them the third-biggest party, for the return of
1 seat (out of 150).

------
coldtea
> _As Article 50 is triggered today, many European expats in Britain, as well
> as European-minded locals, are packing up, moving on or eyeing up their
> options. Brexit brain drain could spell disaster for industries like
> technology already facing shortages of skilled talent._

Sorry, what about the brain drain when those "European expats" came from their
countries into the UK?

Or that doesn't matter because it was all "within EU" anyway?

Still, UK hadn't paid for their education and other benefits while they were
growing up in their native countries, and their native countries didn't get
taxes from those people while they were living in the UK.

And those countries would also like to have their scientists etc stay and work
there to improve the country's industry and economy.

Brain drain works both ways. You can't lament brain drain from an economy that
actually caused brain drain, and now those brains leave it.

~~~
omurphyevans
What about the brains who never moved now moving away?

I am British and have lived here for nearly 40 years. I'm currently looking at
an Irish passport (Irish wife) or maybe France. My taxes and know how will be
better put to use somewhere our values (openness, tolerance, mutual respect)
agree.

~~~
handelaar
If having an irish spouse and not living in Ireland is all you've got, then
you're not getting an Irish passport. On the other hand, you definitely can
have one 3 years after you've moved here.

------
arca_vorago
My theory on brexit has been for a long time now that, after entangling the EU
with the Euro, and globalization actually hurting the first-world EU, the UK
is simply attempting to isolate it's vulnerabilities to the coming impacts of
globalization.

If my theory is true, it means essentially that brexit is designed not to
create wealth in the UK, but to make the losses less than the rest of the
world by comparison.

With such a large surveillance state though, and a massive propaganda
operation wing, the UK has done a good job confusing it's people into the core
reasons because to admit them would be to admit the weaknesses of the global
monetary system it has had a large part in fostering on the world through the
IMF, the World Bank, and fiat, fractional reserve central banking systems not
tied to gold or oil (bretton woods without the key things that made bretton
woods good).

~~~
sangnoir
Your theory assumes a lot of forward-thinking, competence, benevolence and
cooperation between subsequent prime ministers.

The simpler explanation is that David Cameron's gamble to silence the more
extreme side of his party (and UKIP) failed. His (or his pollsters)
incompetence led to this, helped along by protest votes and online Russian
campaigns.

A less charitable explanation is that certain Tory elites took advantage of
the narrow majority to preserve power in their hands - there are a number of
disagreements with the ECHR.

------
leovonl
It's amusing to read all these calls for a more democratic EU, specially when
comparisons with the USA are made.

EU membership is voluntary, you can leave if you want. What would happen if an
USA state decided to leave? Check the history books.

Truly democratic nations respect self-determination principles. In this sense,
USA is closer to the authoritarianism of Spain than to democracies like Canada
or the UK itself.

~~~
Joeri
To be fair, some of the EU leaders have made it clear that they intend to make
the brexit so costly on britain that no one else dare leave. So, it remains to
be seen how voluntary EU membership is.

~~~
UnoriginalGuy
But nobody will die. You're contrasting bad trade terms with literal wars,
really apples and oranges comparison.

------
bambax
From the letter[1] of PM May to Pres. Tusk:

> _At a time when the growth of global trade is slowing and there are signs
> that protectionist instincts are on the rise in many part of the world,
> Europe has a responsibility to stand up for free trade in the interest of
> all our citizens_

This is pretty rich. Protectionist "instincts" are on the rise in the UK and
the US first and foremost today, so maybe those countries are not in the best
position to lecture the rest of the world against them?

The crux of the matter is, countries have no friends and no moral imperatives,
they only have interests; May's letter is very short on what the interests of
the EU are, to try to give the UK a "nice" deal. How would the EU benefit from
a deal -- any deal at all -- vs no deal?

(Also, this is a small detail but maybe not an insignificant one, negotiations
cost money; if there is no hope of gaining anything, why should EU negotiators
even show up? It would save money to simply not talk at all).

[1]
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/29_03_17_article5...](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/29_03_17_article50.pdf)

------
DrNuke
Corbyn for Labour Party: "There are Conservatives who want to use Brexit to
turn this country into a low-wage tax haven." Well, full automation = no wages
at all, ehehe. I am not sure how it is going to end and it is not my strict
business anyway but there is a chance, not a slim chance imho, we may well see
some sort of sci-fi dystopian UK emerging from this process. Interesting times
ahead. Disclaimer: spent five years in the UK on the cusp of the 2007-8
financial crash and could see this was going to happen somehow someday, all
starting from there and from perverse globalisation enhancing inequalities
imho.

------
barking
This story is going to get very boring very quickly.

Little will be decided until close to the deadline in two years.

In the meantime life will go on as normal as it has for the last year.

What is much more interesting is what will happen shortly in France and
whether the phenomena that led to Trump and Brexit are repeated elsewhere in
Europe.

~~~
mpweiher
So far it's looking good. Wilders did not make significant headway in NL, AfD
is down significantly in the polls in Germany and the EU politician who
returned to head the SPD in Germany has dramatically reversed that party's
flagging poll numbers.

Opinion polling for the expected 2nd round of polling in the French
presidential elections put Macron at almost 2/3rd majority vs. Le Pen.

Overall, pro-EU sentiment in EU member nations is rising.

~~~
barking
Maybe, but opinion polls got it wrong in the cases of Trump and Brexit. It
seems a lot of people who intend vote on the right (for the want of a better
term) are coy about it when asked.

~~~
mpweiher
I knew someone was going to mention that.

Yes.

However, I mostly talked about relative movement of polls. While not entirely
impossible, it seems implausible that people should suddenly all get more coy.
Especially after "their side" just had huge victories. If anything, I'd expect
them to be less coy than before, because they just got validated.

And the one absolute I mentioned about the French runoff is 2/3rd vs. 1/3rd.
Trump and Brexit polls were never that far apart.

~~~
barking
Le Pen is steady at about 1/3 Macron is at about the same with everyone
expecting the final 1/3 to support him in a run-off. Seems pretty safe for
Macron. I don't know much about France, is there ever much of a shift before
the second vote historically?

------
alkonaut
Since the actual outcome now seems to be that it'sore England leaving the UK,
than the UK leaving the EU - doesn't that constitute a huge change in
circumstances, enough to warrant at least a parliamentary election before the
exit is triggered?

I mean, imagine if the Brexit ballot had said "Do you want for the UK to
remain intact in the EU, or be broken apart with England and Wales leaving the
EU?"

Or if it had 3 options

\- remain

\- leave

\- leave, if the UK stays intact.

Leave would never had won. Which makes this whole charade completely insane.

~~~
coroxout
Leave would probably never have won if the ballot paper specified leaving the
single market, either.

It might also not have won if the ballot paper had said "leaving will provide
no extra money for the NHS, actually probably less money because the pound
will be devalued and much of the NHS workforce comes from Europe, and also
various prominent Leave campaigners are actually eager to dismantle the NHS
and privatise healthcare bit by bit".

But, oh well, we are where we are, I suppose.

------
Someone
I know it is nerdy, but what a weird PDF
([http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/29_03_17_article5...](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/29_03_17_article50.pdf))

Pages 1 and 4 are text (allow text selection), the other ones are images (on
iPad)

I wonder what process could have led to that; it is not simply a matter of
having one section produced in a different way from the other, as, for
example, page 5 continues an enumeration started on page 4.

------
k__
Hopefully, like Trump in the US, this will wake them up.

~~~
72deluxe
Who? And wake up to what? To do what?

~~~
k__
The people of the UK.

I had the feeling they were resting on the inherited wealth of their empire
for rather long now. They always wanted special treatments in the EU. They
even pay mad bucks on their royals for basically nothing.

Maybe this Brexit will go down bad and they will change their ways and join
the EU in 10-20 years as 'real' members.

But I don't have many hopes in that. Probably they will end up like
Switzerland or something :/

~~~
poooogles
>They even pay mad bucks on their royals for basically nothing.

Royal family costs the UK £307m (highest number) with a revenue from them of
£500m [1]. Seems like good business to keep paying for them.

1\.
[https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/is...](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/is-
the-british-royal-family-worth-the-money/278052/)

~~~
daemin
I've heard two different versions of this.

The first being that the Royal family actually makes the UK money because they
cost less to maintain than what is made up for in brand image and tourism
benefits.

The second is that because they don't pay tax, it means their enterprises are
not as efficient and the return on the crown lands is about half of what could
be expected on a normal enterprise.

The source for both these viewpoints are videos on YouTube. The first is from
CGPGrey (I think), while the second is a reply to that video.

~~~
Sholmesy
CGPGrey's vids are awesome. Unique perspective as an American living in the
UK. I highly encourage anyone interested to go seek them out.

Also, he mentions in his podcasts that he is a HN user.

------
empressplay
Democracy is a double-edged sword. I may not like the way it cuts sometimes,
but no way in hell I'll ever put it down.

~~~
k-mcgrady
>> I may not like the way it cuts sometimes, but no way in hell I'll ever put
it down.

Why not? It's not a perfect process and blindly accepting it because
'democracy is good' is dangerous.

Personally I'm against Brexit and don't think we should go through with it.
BUT the reason I don't think we should go through with it is that most voters
were woefully uninformed or completely misinformed. Both sides were lied to
and manipulated. Having a referendum on an issue that experts fail to
understand is just plain idiotic. If there was a way to have a well informed
vote and it didn't go my way I would accept it without complaint.

------
robin_reala
The Guardian have published the letter on Scribd:
[https://www.scribd.com/document/343396953/PM-Letter-to-EU-
Co...](https://www.scribd.com/document/343396953/PM-Letter-to-EU-Council-
President)

------
Animats
Scotland now wants to get out of the United Kingdom and stay in the EU. When
this thing settles down, the EU will probably be OK, but England will stand
alone.

------
maverick_iceman
Hopefully, UK will now get rid of onerous, business-strangling regulations of
the EU. That's at least one good aspect of Brexit.

------
dijit
I'm British but live in the EU. I've been watching this from the outside and
it makes me so very sad and despondent. Forgetting any inconvenience on my
part (of which there are very few -I likely have access to an EU passport.).

It's fucking stupid. No ifs, no buts, no apologies and respecting of alternate
opinions. Just fucking stupid. Every single reason for leaving (other than
"leave so the EU can get on without UK obstructions) has been debunked. Poeple
protest voted, they voted with feelings instead of sense. They ignored people
who knew what they were talking about and went with idiotic soundbites. I
don't know what the actual fuck is going through the minds of our government,
but it's not sense.

Hell, it's going ahead. We don't have the manpower, experience or knowledge to
replace things that have been done with the EU. The boring administration.
Standards, procedures... All the little details that mean the difference
between something that works and something that doesn't.

I trust the EU oversight much further than the bunch of fools in the UK. Too
entwined with their own interests. Who has bought them, why are they so scared
of newspapers, why they seem utter cowards... We have some wonderful examples
of how education and arrogance can seem like intelligence.

Aaaand yup, this is a rant now. I shall carry on, because now I'm finding it a
little cathartic.

I'm not left wing, not right. I earn well above the average. I'm a pragmatist
and I firmly believe that having strong and successful neighbours is good. I
do not want a neighbour that throws the metaphorical shite over the fence.
There are poorer countries in the EU. Movement is good between countries and
those that people complain about will not bother taking the leap when their
home country is made attractive enough not to.

Nothing is perfect. The EU is far from it, because it involves people... But
they move slowly in a direction of interest to its citizens. Not just in the
interest of the people of those governments.

It's been pissed away by liars and imbeciles now. I cannot unite behind it in
the same way I would try to stop idiots from walking off a cliff, rather than
joining them.

Possibly a little harsh. Probably not though.

~~~
dijit
It's rather notable that the UK has the option of aborting this process during
the 2 years. (According to an EU official who's name I forget), it's
incredibly unlikely that anyone will go back on this though. The uncertainty
of having this option available is bad for the UK though. Markets hate
uncertainty.

~~~
s_kilk
Does it?

I thought Article 50 was very much a 'hand grenade', once the pin is out
there's no going back. If the two years run out without an agreement being
reached, doesn't the UK just get chucked out and revert to WTO rules?

~~~
dijit
[http://nordic.businessinsider.com/eu-brexit-resolution-
artic...](http://nordic.businessinsider.com/eu-brexit-resolution-
article-50-can-be-revoked-2017-3?r=UK&IR=T)

Says "leaked document"

~~~
pricechild
> "subject to conditions set by all EU27 so they cannot be used as a
> procedural device or abused in an attempt to improve the actual terms of the
> United Kingdom's membership."

Is an interesting quote. It implies that everyone has to be in agreement? So
one country could veto our remaining?

I'm assuming any remaining being agreed would also be subject to us losing
special privileges we enjoyed yesterday.

Who knows what the final process will be following negotiations &
interpretations.

------
soroso
#PunishUK

------
dep_b
Sure enough Henry VIII leaving the Holy Church of Rome will lead to all kinds
of disaster for the kingdom. Oh wait no, they actually went on to rule about
half of the world afterwards.

~~~
genma_it
Sure, and they ruled so well that today that half of the world lives in peace
and it is proud to have been a British colony.

~~~
dep_b
Which was a problem for the British back then in what sense?

Looking back at it now with our current look on things, for the other
countries involved, sure.

------
gonvaled
Theresa May wants deep and special partnership with the EU, without
contributing at all to its existence. If every country in the EU does the
same, guess what, there is no EU.

And without EU, without compromises, without rules, without standards, without
common legislation, nothing of value rests. Just a bunch of countries, a bunch
of private enterprises, trying to cherry pick in each an every transaction,
looking for the shortest of short term profits, continuously changing course,
now associating with this country, now with this other. Now selling round
bananas, tomorrow selling bananas polluted with lead. Today not allowing
imports of bananas from Romania because they are not straight enough, and
tomorrow not accepting them from Italy because they are too straight.

Foreign citizens get expelled with made up reasons, according to what the
popular opinion of the moment is. Trucks get delayed or not in a complete
obscure manner.

Products get made and exported without any respect for work or environmental
regulations. Quality does not satisfy any kind of standards. Nobody can trust
any foreign business because there is no institution to complain to in case
consumer rights are not respected. Financial products are sold to steal
savings from foreign investors - until this is recognized and foreign
investors stop using those investment vehicles, completely destroying the
market.

------
redsummer
Great news. Of the four happiest countries in the world, three are European
countries outside the EU. Autonomy is crucial to happiness.

~~~
redsummer
A great thing about autonomy is the ability to quickly solve national
problems. Compare and contrast non-EU Iceland and EU Greece. Both came near to
collapse due to financial crises. Iceland jailed the bankers and recovered.
Greece is in the EU straight-jacket, the corrupt bankers became kings and the
people will be in debt bondage for decades.

Brexit is comparable to the Berlin Wall falling. Like the Soviet Union, the
technocratic elites could not imagine it collapsing until the people willed
it.

~~~
pimterry
> Greece is in the EU straight-jacket

The lack of freedom for Greece to manage its finances is because it's a member
of the Euro, not the EU. That isn't really relevant to the UK.

And as far as I know, neither the Euro nor EU laws limited the Greeks' ability
to prosecute their bankers. Is there a reason those are connected?

~~~
atmosx
> And as far as I know, neither the Euro nor EU laws limited the Greeks'
> ability to prosecute their bankers.

Same could be said for Ireland[1]. You might wanna take a closer look.

In the words of M. Thatcher: "He who controls interest rates in Europe,
controls Europe."

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnG0bq77N8w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnG0bq77N8w)]

------
logicallee
The EU should treat this like America treated secessionist states - the UK
should be compelled to stay by force. Obviously there should not be any actual
war, since the Brtis should just say, "well, all right."

Afterward they should be full, normal participants, just as every state is a
normal participant in the United States and has equal and fair votes in the
Senate and House of Representatives.

Why should this be done:

1 - America shows that it is great that there is a unified country, which
benefits from huge economies of scale.

2 - Can you imagine how much money is saved by not having to have border
control, separate visas and citizenships in the United States? The same
applies to the EU.

3 - The EU should directly compete with the United States as the second of
three world poles (Asia being the third).

4 - The good of the Union outweighs the UK's selfish and shortsighted act.

Why shouldn't history repeat?

Would America be better-off if it were split into two countries?

Would America be the world's leading economy (by far)?

Citing the close historical precedent I have mentioned, I do not think that
the UK should be allowed to leave the EU. Its request should be denied.

~~~
mattmanser
Putting aside the lack of knowledge of the situation or what the EU actually
is, the UK has nuclear weapons, the highest EU defence spending and a
permanent UN security council seat. The EU has no army.

What you propose would mean the end of the UN, the end of NATO, the end of the
EU and a possible WW3. And Russia would probably 'liberate' a few border
countries from the 'imperialistic EU' while that's all happening.

~~~
logicallee
Its request should still be denied. I notice you have not in any way attacked
my historical foundation, secessionist states. The implication that the UK
would detonate a nuclear bomb over this is laughable on its face.

Its request should be denied.

~~~
mattmanser
I'm not attacking it because it is stupid and shows a shocking lack of
knowledge of the situation.

The EU is not a country, it is a trade union with aspirations to become a full
political union one day. You're talking like it's the latter when it's not.

~~~
logicallee
You grossly underestimate the long-term importance of it and its institutions.
it's not just a "trade union" as a glance at its budget will show. Anyway we
obviously have a different vision for it.

