
Britain’s scientists are freaking out over Brexit - antimora
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/britains-scientists-are-freaking-out-over-brexit/2016/07/28/5735fb26-5375-11e6-b652-315ae5d4d4dd_story.html
======
icefo
Same kind of thing is happening in Switzerland.

The people voted to restrict the number of foreigners that can go in the
country which is against the treaty of free movement that Switzerland signed
with the EU which probably (it has been a while since I looked up the
consequences) make lots if not all the other treaties that Switzerland and the
EU signed invalid. For example the EU is threatening to cut research funding
among other stuff like partnership in space exploration...

The people that were against the law didn't think it would pass and didn't
really fight against it and now Switzerland and the EU have until the end of
year to agree on something. I wonder how it will pan out... Maybe a revote ?
You probably didn't understand the consequences of this law. Are you sure you
want this ?

~~~
Kenji
Yes, I'm sure I want this. Are you sure you want to get bribed with money for
science to completely give up every single shred of independence and autonomy?
The issue is much larger than science funding. The issue is that the EU
bullies and pushes everyone in Europe around at its whim and people are
incredibly fearful of taking back control of their own countries because of EU
repercussions. Just think: The EU threatens to cancel student exchanges with
Switzerland if the Swiss control their borders again. These are absolutely
disgusting power plays: The student exchange has a longstanding tradition and
existed way before the EU shat in its diapers, and during a time where border
controls were very strict. And now it thinks it can just cancel that? Why
isn't anyone calling the EU out on this? The Swiss people voted for something,
it would be unconstitutional and even illegal not to do it now. If this does
not happen, the Swiss direct democracy has been overruled by the EU, which
would be an extremely dangerous and undemocratic precedent.

~~~
icefo
I was talking about a revote because I think that too much people voted
thinking: yeah less foreigners sounds good and had no idea of the possible
consequences if the swiss diplomats didn't work a miracle

As a swiss this saddens me but I think the EU is right to use the big guns
because free movement is the foundation of the EU. If the swiss get an
exception it would be hard to deny it to other states. "Unfair ! I also want
to restrict the number of polish going in my country"

I think that the swiss government should focus on punishing salary-dumping
because that's what most people are afraid of when they think of foreigners:
he's going to do my job for less money. I heard it's a big problem in Tessin.

Firms should be able to hire anyone they want but they should give them a
swiss salary, swiss or not and pay a big fine if they don't.

~~~
tomp
_> I think that the swiss government should focus on p unishing salary-dumping
because that's what most people are afraid of when they think of foreigners:
he's going to do my job for less money. I heard it's a big problem in Tessin._

How exactly would you "punish" this (or otherwise prevent it)? I mean, it
happens due to market dynamics, so it's either salary dumping, no free
movement of people, or no capitalism!

~~~
icefo
You raise a good point. Maybe with a minimum wage but the swiss voted against
it. I honestly have no other idea.

------
unfunco
I voted to remain, I believe that being in the EU is beneficial to the United
Kingdom. This article, however, at the very beginning suggests:

> Britain has been a powerhouse of discovery since the age of science began.
> Newton, Darwin, Crick? They parted the curtain on gravity, evolution and
> DNA.

> Now comes Brexit, and to use a non-scientific term, the scientists in the
> country are freaking out.

Britain joined the EEC in 1973, the discovery of gravity, evolution, and
deoxyribonucleic acid, all happened well before we joined the union and
happened without EU funding. I don't think the sciences will suffer too much
from a withdrawal of EU funding, since the government will want to remain a
leader in these fields, the industries that will suffer will be agricultural
and manufacturing, fields that are deemed to primitive for the current
century.

~~~
sievebrain
Agriculture might benefit because the UK now has the option of allowing GM
crops, which the EU tries hard to block for what it claims are health reasons
but (given the lack of scientific evidence to support such a policy) is
actually yet another form of agricultural protectionism.

~~~
unfunco
Farming is heavily subsidised by the EU though, only this morning the
Independent was reporting that farmers are now regretting the decision since
their funding could be lost, and that they voted leave because they didn't
understand the ramifications: [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/farmers-
brexit-regret-b...](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/farmers-brexit-
regret-bregret-funding-common-agricultural-policy-a7163996.html)

It could be spin, the farmers I know though (I'm originally from a very rural
town in mid-Wales) don't really understand what GM means, they're old school
wellies and corn hanging out their mouth types.

~~~
sievebrain
The Independent might as well be the official state outlet of the EU as far as
I can tell. You'd get more balanced coverage from reading Chinese media about
China. Just taking a few representative headlines from its website:

[http://www.independent.co.uk/topic/brexit](http://www.independent.co.uk/topic/brexit)

"Why there could be post-Brexit riots this summer"

"Ford to consider closing UK factories in Leave towns after Brexit"

"The only way to save Britain after Brexit? Stop London's dominance"

"Brexit blamed for Bank of Japan monetary stimulus plans"

"Brexit doesn't make me proud to be British"

"I've been mapping kindness across the country to tackle racism"

"Why our post-Brexit economy can't be saved by slashing interest rates"

"Revealed: the shocking scale of racist hate since the Brexit vote"

"Incident by incident – the grim litany of post-Brexit hate crime"

~~~
unfunco
I actually agree, I (maybe consciously, maybe subconsciously) choose to read
the news from the left, since the United Kingdom doesn't really have balanced
news. The BBC, for example, might as well be the official state outlet of the
Conservatives and American news democrats, with their outright disdain for
Corbyn, and their refusal (with late acceptance) to publish stories about DNC
leaks – I'm forced to pay for the BBC, I'm not forced to pay for news from the
left.

~~~
sievebrain
If you deliberately seek out news sources you know to be biased, and then
compare them to other news sources, aren't you always going to conclude that
those other sources are biased in the other direction?

You say the BBC has "outright disdain" for Corbyn but in my experience BBC
News does manage to do a pretty good job of being unbiased. Are you sure that
they aren't just reporting an unfiltered flow of stories and many of them
happy to be pretty negative, thus they may seem to be biased?

------
Normal_gaussian
I have had the unusual pleasure of being amongst two distinct groups of people
over the last few months.

Firstly, a group of businessowners. 'local' businesses though most have strong
ties to the local port or northern regions of France. Pre-brexit they were
mostly close mouthed on the issue, though personal conversations indicated a
lean to leave. Post brexit they are generally quite happy; their foreign
affairs are relatively easy to keep in order and they have just gained
leverage on the local stage.

The other group is composed of PhD students and their professors. I'm a casual
aquaintance to these people, mainly on the student end, and have dropped in
for lunch a few times (and after work pints). These guys are all anti brexit.
I know from the way they make up stories about why people voted out and then
insult them - its quite unpleasant. From what I gather very little of their
funding comes from the EU, but I'm not familliar enough with their funding
system to judge them on it.

It seems we have a shit ton of echo chambers in this country.

~~~
gakada
> I know from the way they make up stories about why people voted out and then
> insult them - its quite unpleasant

You dismiss the possibility that they are right. Many people do support Brexit
for wholly racist reasons (e.g. my father who wants to 'get the poles out').

~~~
tomp
That's not racism. Xenophobia, maybe, but obviously not racism.

~~~
saalweachter
Why is it obviously not racism?

~~~
tomp
Because Polish and British people are of the same race (white/Caucasian).

~~~
saalweachter
You do know that historically (and like recently as well) white people --
specifically British and British-descended white people -- have been all sorts
of racist towards other people we now consider white (but didn't always),
including but not limited to, people of Italian, Irish, Jewish, and, yes,
Polish heritage?

~~~
tomp
I find that quite hard to believe, as I don't see any visual distinction
between Brits, Ashkenazi Jews, Irish (unless ginger), northern Italians and
Poles. Southern nations could be distinguished (e.g. southern Italians,
Spaniards, Greeks), in that case it could have been racism (e.g. in the US
they still consider "Hispanics" a different race, although I don't).

------
lorenzhs
Since most of the discussion here seems to revolve around funding, let me
point out that the article is mostly about other factors:

"Worse than a possible dip in funding is the research community’s fear that
collaborators abroad will slink away and the island’s universities will find
themselves isolated. [...] The community is asking: Will the foreigners
continue to be welcome in British laboratories and will British researchers
continue be partners with collaborators from abroad?"

Funding can be replaced, but if foreign researchers have a harder time getting
into Britain, that could be a problem for research in the UK

~~~
superswordfish
This sounds like fear-mongering. Is there reason to believe that foreign
researchers will have a hard time getting into the UK? This surely is not an
issue for the US, which is not part of the EU.

~~~
thenomad
Yes, there definitely is.

The difficulties of getting non-EU nationals into the UK to work are already
pretty much top of the complaints list of folk I know who run significant IT
companies.

I don't know about the academic sector, but in general UK immigration law is
already very harsh, and the exit from the EU was largely driven by a desire to
limit immigration.

~~~
mattmanser
In 2014 the net migration into the UK was 318,000. Half of that was from
outside of the EU.

That's .5% increase in our population per year. Per year! The net migration to
the UK has gone mental since 1996.

It's simply not sustainable. House prices are crazy, council services and the
NHS are struggling as we cut funding due to austerity and you're complaining
about how _hard_ it is to get into the UK when we've actually been letting in
massive amounts of people.

Unbelievable.

[http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-
sta...](http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics)

~~~
thenomad
One question - why do you say it's not sustainable?

I agree that an increase in population requires an increase in funding to the
NHS (or at least keeping the funding stable per capita) and more housing.

But I don't see why those things are impossible, given the political will to
make them happen.

------
tim333
I've got a hunch brexit basically isn't going to happen. The vote was advisory
and our new PM was a remainer. It's incredibly difficult to really leave
without screwing the economy. See
[http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/07/14/everything-you-
ne...](http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/07/14/everything-you-need-to-know-
about-theresa-may-s-brexit)

The article concludes May will probably kick the problem into the long grass
which she seems to be doing by saying it won't happen without Scottish
agreement which probably won't happen.

~~~
sievebrain
You appear to be in denial.

"Our new PM was a remainer" \- but, she was eurosceptic her entire career, the
very first thing she said was literally "Brexit means Brexit", she has
repeatedly confirmed it's going to happen and she has set up an entirely new
ministry to ensure it does. Meanwhile the EU is so impatient for it to happen
they are demanding it starts immediately. There is no way back.

With respect to "it's difficult to leave without screwing the economy", that
seems hard to justify given the number of countries that are not in the EU and
yet which are not "screwed".

~~~
tim333
I may appear to be in denial but look at the two closest comparison countries
that voted to not be in the EU, Switzerland and Norway. The voters said out
but there were huge practical problems with being out so they ended up with
basically being in the EU but not completely. That's what I think the most
likely outcome will be - something like those countries, still with free trade
and movement but a fudge where the politicians can say look we're independent.

Incidentally on the denial thing I voted remain but bet leave would win at the
bookies. I'm predicting a Norway solution as the most likely bet rather than
my preference.

~~~
sievebrain
The Norway solution was already ruled out by the PM.

I agree that there will end up being some compromise, eventually: one that
involves free trade without freedom of movement a la CETA. The question is
only how long it takes to get there. The EU is starting to realise that
leaving is in fact thinkable, and is caving on issues that might upset local
populations. Eventually it will realise that blocking European co-operation
and blaming it on a country that wants to sign deals isn't going to fly.

------
gggggg11111
Britain has enough of "experts" apparently
[https://next.ft.com/content/3be49734-29cb-11e6-83e4-abc22d5d...](https://next.ft.com/content/3be49734-29cb-11e6-83e4-abc22d5d108c)

The whole Brexit hoopla was filled with dishonesty and anti-intellectualism
that would make likes of Trump proud

no wonder scientists are suffering, sure who needs experts...

~~~
sievebrain
The claim you're making is itself an example of dishonesty and anti-
intellectualism. Let's take a look at what Gove actually said - the full
quote, not the abridged version people like to throw around:

 _" I think the people in this country have had enough of experts from
organisations with acronyms saying that they know what is best and getting it
consistently wrong"_

Gove was clearly talking about a very specific subset of all possible
'experts' here - the ones from various (mostly governmental) acronymed
organisations who have a long track record of making incorrect forecasts and
yet still claim to be able to predict the future using their 'expertise'. The
campaign was full of absurdly precise predictions like "leaving the EU will
cost each household exactly £4300 a year".

Gove's position is not unreasonable or anti-intellectual. Post-vote, Paul
Krugman started laying into economists and the economics profession as a
whole, saying essentially that economists didn't deserve to be trusted because
they so often made arguments that were just intellectual-sounding nonsense.

[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/06/30/the-
macroeconomi...](http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/06/30/the-
macroeconomics-of-brexit-motivated-reasoning/?module=BlogPost-
Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body)

[http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/07/02/more-on-the-
shor...](http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/07/02/more-on-the-short-run-
macroeconomics-of-brexit/?module=BlogPost-
Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body)

~~~
gonvaled
So people are tired of _incompetent_ experts? Sure!

And experts from organisations with acronyms? As oposed to those from
organisations without acronyms?

This looks like he wants to hear opinions from his preferred kind of experts.

~~~
sievebrain
The Platonian ideal of an unbiased, expert economist who can see into the
future is a fantasy. No such people exist.

~~~
gonvaled
Sure, so he was chosing his particular brand of experts, of which there seems
to be few.

------
known
"Diversity society will fail" \--Putnam;
[http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/t...](http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/)

------
MistahKoala
But nowhere near as much as headline writers are.

------
chrisbennet
Sometimes when my friends and I go to a restaurant we've never been to, we
look at the menu and change our minds and decide to go somewhere else.

Can the UK do something like that i.e. get the best terms possible from the EU
and then put that to a vote?

~~~
tigershark
Uk had the best possible deal in the EU. Now, as a best case, they will pay
the same amount of money (like Norway and Switzerland), they will still have
free circulation from EU people (like Norway and Switzerland) to have access
to the EU market without all the benefits that they enjoyed earlier. And this
is the best case, I can't imagine UK cut off from Europe with all the jobs in
the City of London and Canary Wharf that will migrate somewhere else, along
with all the other industries that are heavily disinvesting as of now.

~~~
chrisbennet
I don't think they will have free circulation so I think that the "best case"
will be worse (than Norway & Switzerland).

------
jimmytidey
I think the cultural angle is much overlooked here. Yes, a lot of funding
comes from the EU, but it's about more than money.

In a University you work with many people from all over the world, and success
depends on doing so.

Of course you end up favouring international cooperation at a policy level.
Your values are shaped by your personal experience.

~~~
Silhouette
_In a University you work with many people from all over the world, and
success depends on doing so._

This is the thing I don't quite understand about the position described in the
article here. We already do have partnerships with other researchers _from all
over the world_ , not just the EU. I've seen some academics talking as if it
will suddenly be impossible for colleagues from other EU member states to come
and work in our universities, or vice versa. Sometimes they were literally
making that argument with a colleague from a US university sitting on one side
of them and a colleague from Japan on the other!

There are plenty of legitimate concerns that will need to be addressed, and
the uncertainty in the near future affecting those planning longer term
projects or research funding isn't helpful. However, the idea that it will
become dramatically more difficult to collaborate with colleagues from the
other EU member states or to run research programmes together seems paranoid
at this stage.

------
cm2187
The UK is a net payer of the EU budget. It can replace all EU subsidies like
for like and still save some money as a result of Brexit.

~~~
junto
It could but it won't. Same as economic support for the Celtic fringes. Wales,
Scotland and Northern Ireland are not going to see the same level of
investment from Whitehall that they have from Brussels. When Margaret Thatcher
took aim at the trade unions and in one full swoop killed off various b
British industries, she made no British attempt to fix the problem. It took EU
money and EU programs to setup enterprise zones in the Celtic fringes. UK
governments have long ignored the needs of the country outside the south east.

Same as investment in the NHS, which although not funded by the EU has badly
needed structured investment for decades. Never happens. Successive
governments just blame their predecessors or bad management and on this the
cycle.

~~~
HillRat
The EU also funds, e.g., nursing education programmes at ex-polys that aren't
likely to survive a post-Brexit funding winter. NHS staffing isn't quite so
critical -- NHS is highly reliant on immigration from the Commonwealth more
than the EU -- but it still would pose a concern.

