Hacker News Reader

Comment by Kenji | Hacker News Reader

It's funny how one might think that being in the EU is voluntary, but as it seems, a country cannot get out, or really, regain any sovereignty, for fear of economic problems. That is like saying "I cannot leave this abusive relationship because I will be lonely and heartbroken." and continue to get punched and scratched every day.

View on HN

Not really - I mean we always have the option to e.g. set all the country's hospitals on fire. It would just be a bad idea. Doesn't mean we "don't control our own hospitals"

If you are in a relationship with someone and you share rent for a flat, breaking up with them would mean that now you live on your own and have to pay 2x as much. It's a serious economic concern, because it might cripple you financially, at least until you find another roommate or move.

But, that doesn't mean that you are not free to break up with someone. You just have to be an adult about it and live with the consequences.

I mean, there is a more subtle point right there.

In actual abusive relationships this interdependency is one of the important factors that keeps the abused in the relationship. It’s one of the things that makes abusive relationships so hard to escape and consequently so horrific.

That said, interdependency is also just as much a part of non-abusive and completely healthy relationships, i.e. the mere existence of interdependency doesn’t decide whether a relationship is abusive or not.

To me the EU and UK relationship is a clearly non-abusive one. I wouldn’t call it healthy, but mostly because the UK is frequently completely disengaged from the process and disinterested in actually being part of the relationship. They could have so much say and power … but they don’t want to. Rather they want to spend all their time worrying and drawing up horror scenarios.

I do not want the UK to leave, but I also don’t think that a UK this disengaged is not very productive to have inside the EU.

It's a relative situation though. The countries that exit would have worse economy than before the exit. But that's simply because they would likely have a worse economy if they never joined in the first place. Also, some temporary extra issues have to be expected - there's a lot of changes that will take some time after the exit. (at least rebalancing import-export partners)

> The countries that exit would have worse economy than before the exit.

Why is that guaranteed? I'd imagine that the argument can be made in both directions.

General uncertainty, new tax rules, companies folding due to extra regulations on international business, reduced travel (business and holiday), less available workforce to choose from, current employees forced to leave, other EU countries dropping some existing arrangements because fuck it, changes in internal politics depending on people liking the government more/less, ...

Not all of that has to happen (depends on the terms of leaving). I'm not even saying that it's going to last long. But I'd bet on at least 6 months of uncertainty and chaos which is going to affect the economy in a bad way.

Just to play devil's advocate, none of those things are assured (apart from increased volatility due to the uncertainty for sure, as you mention). Perhaps Britain would even have the chance to actually to make itself more attractive to business by competing more favourably with Europe.

Regarding your point about current employees being forced to leave, this is one of the things that worry me most - with friends, colleagues etc. Luckily, most sources indicate that anyone already legally working in Britain would be granted permanent settlement rights. It would be a shame if good people in future are unable to migrate though!

It is a voluntary relationship, but both parties have stakes in it and provide certain benefits and possibly some negatives to each other. That's how every relationship works and that doesn't make it abusive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com