
Fool Britannia: the future of the UK has never looked so grim - fanf2
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/fool-britannia-brexit-uk-great-britain/article37137569/
======
tim333
Slightly on the positive there was a poll published last weekend in the Mail
of all places saying

"And there is clear support for a second referendum on the final Brexit deal.
One in two say there should be a second vote when all the talking is done,
against 34 per cent who are opposed."

I mean if we can see what is actually on the table and the majority of voters
still want it then I guess fair enough. It seems iffy though to ram Brexit
through regardless of how bad it is on the basis of an ill informed vote a
while back.

~~~
T-A
I find it hard to conjure up a realistic scenario where there is enough time
to hold a second referendum before March 2019. Just getting a majority to
agree on holding it, and on the exact question to be asked, seems hard enough.
And getting the EU to agree on how to handle a reversal would be a giant can
of worms on top of Brexit negotiations.

~~~
tim333
The EU would probably be up for extending the deadline and cancelling the
whole thing. The main argument against a vote at the end has been the EU would
give us a crappy deal to make us stay.

------
fractallyte
This is an incendiary, one-sided opinion piece.

The author's forgetting that there was a referendum. You know, that thing
where the populace actually gets to decide democratically on something, for
once.

~~~
eviltories
A referendum where the Leave campaign was based on a pack of lies,
unfortunately. So many people blamed the EU for their woes, when really they
should be looking at the damage the Tories have done to the UK.

~~~
Boothroid
Remain too. We were told that on the day after a vote to leave there would be
an immediate crash of financial markets and recession. That didn't happen.

~~~
boyce
Sensible heads weren't predicting an instant crash but greatly reduced growth
and loss of value of the currency.

If you're cherry picking daft predictions there were plenty on each side.

~~~
Boothroid
The Treasury's document today says: "A vote to leave would cause an immediate
and profound economic shock creating instability and uncertainty which would
be compounded by the complex and interdependent negotiations that would
follow".

[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-to-
cr...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brexit-to-create-
instant-diy-recession-warns-george-osborne-a7042886.html)

~~~
rlpb
That did happen, didn't it?

No "immediate crash of financial markets and recession", but it doesn't appear
that they predicted that.

~~~
Boothroid
Why don't you try to refute my general point? There was FUD on both sides. I'm
just seeking to point this out to those with selective memories that bleat on
about the £350m claim as if the remain side were whiter than white. They were
not! Just accept it.

And after some more research I can confirm the Treasury actually did predict
an immediate crash. You are exactly 100% wrong.

~~~
rlpb
> Why don't you try to refute my general point?

I'm not arguing against you. I'm pointing out that you haven't made an
argument.

A claim with no documented basis is not an informed one, doesn't add anything
to the debate and is useless to everyone involved.

> And after some more research I can confirm the Treasury actually did predict
> an immediate crash. You are exactly 100% wrong.

Again, you've failed to provide any citation for your claim. Until you provide
a citation, readers should disregard your comments as if you haven't said
anything.

~~~
Boothroid
'Brexit would prompt stock market and house price crash, says IMF'

[https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/13/imf-
warns-s...](https://amp.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/13/imf-warns-stock-
market-crash-house-price-fall-eu-referendum-brexit)

'How bad could it get? Morgan Stanley warns British stocks could lose nearly
20 percent in a Brexit win scenario. Bank of America Merrill Lynch believes
U.S. stocks could lose upwards of 7 percent. Citigroup sees European stocks
down 20 percent. Deutsche Bank sees 10 percent downside risk.'

[https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/could-brexit-vote-cause-
a-s...](https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/could-brexit-vote-cause-a-stock-
market-crash/)

'Unemployment would rocket. Tumbleweed would billow through deserted high
streets. Share prices would crash. The government would struggle to find
buyers for UK bonds. Financial markets would be in meltdown. Britain would be
plunged instantly into another deep recession.

Remember all that? ..It hasn’t worked out that way. ..it is obvious that the
sky has not fallen in as a result of the referendum, and those who said it
would look a bit silly.'

[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/20/brexit...](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/20/brexit-
eu-referendum-economy-project-fear)

'To the shock of many — not least business titans who bankrolled the Remain
campaign — the instant collapse doesn’t seem to be happening.'

[https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/that-brexit-
apocalypse-i...](https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/that-brexit-apocalypse-
it-just-isnt-happening/)

Somehow I doubt you would be so scrupulous in asking for sources for generally
known facts if they were not so inconvenient for your position. I'm also
interested to know in what world you think 'immediate and profound economic
shock' does not correspond with a stock market crash.

~~~
rlpb
You said, above "And after some more research I can confirm the Treasury
actually did predict an immediate crash"

But your links seem to be the opinions of others and not the Treasury.

Where in your "more research" have you found that the Treasury predicted a
stock market crash? Or do you still not have any evidence for your claim?

~~~
Boothroid
OK so disregard the Treasury then if it makes you happy - my general point
stands, despite your effort to split hairs - there was massive concerted lies
and deceit from leave, and subsequent 'despite Brexit' stories from the BBC
etc in their attempt to distract from the egg on their faces. Care to address
the leave FUD directly? I suspect you've exhausted your rhetorical armoury by
now.

~~~
rlpb
> ...there was massive concerted lies and deceit from leave...

I assume you meant "remain" there. But in any case: from whom?

So far you've cited an American news network, financial institutions such as
Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Citigroup, and some UK journalists
referencing hearsay. In what way did these commentators represent "leave" or
"remain"?

On the other side you've got Leave.EU, an actual group campaigning to leave,
misleading people with the NHS funding claim on their campaign bus.

You are conflating groups who actually actively campaigned for one side of the
referendum with some random general groups who stated an opinion - some of
whom are not even associated with the UK!

Of course you're going to be able to find some people who thought that bad
things would happen; just as it is possible to find some people who thought
that good things would happen. But the ability to find people who had some
opinion is meaningless in any debate.

There's a long way to go from there to then claim that people who predicted
bad things were "massive concerted lies and deceit" as if that's somehow
equivalent to a campaign group misleading voters that at one point aimed to be
the officially recognised electoral campaigners for the leave vote.

So no, your general point doesn't stand. You have not demonstrated FUD from
the remain side.

~~~
Boothroid
Do you honestly believe there was no FUD from the remain side? If so you are
obviously a troll or out of touch with reality. There literally hundreds of
hits if you google brexit scaremongering or similar that reference scare
tactics both within and outside of the UK, but no doubt you will refuse to
accept that that proves anything either, so I wish you well with getting back
in touch with the real world.

~~~
rlpb
> > You have not demonstrated FUD from the remain side.

> Do you honestly believe there was no FUD from the remain side?

Do you really not understand the distinction between these two statements?

~~~
Boothroid
Stop avoiding the question: do you honestly believe there was not FUD from the
remain side? I suggested you google brexit scaremongering to enlighten
yourself. Did you do that? You are obviously a troll :)

------
dovdovdov
I wonder why every single article is just about what a clusterf*ck Brexit is,
and not about who might be behind it and who are the actual benefiters of it.

~~~
boomka
If you look around, you will find that info quite easily. Here is just one
example of good analysis on that topic:
[https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/11/legato-brexiteers-
fa...](https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/11/legato-brexiteers-favorite-
think-tank-who-behind-them.html)

~~~
dovdovdov
I meant somewhat mainstream media. Sure there is a random source in any topic,
with pro and counterarguments.

~~~
Doctor_Fegg
Carole Cadwalladr has been doing very good work on this in the Observer (the
Guardian's Sunday sister paper, but with a substantially independent staff
even though its content appears online at theguardian.com).

