Comment by monk_e_boy | Hacker News Reader

Comment by monk_e_boy | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Part of the problem is "vote leave" became "vote leave because racist" so most of the vote leavers have kept quiet.

There is a whole bunch of reasons to vote leave and the debates for the last 6 months have been very informative. These, you missed. But radio 4 had debates most days from smart people on both sides. Older people listen to the radio and watch debates on the TV.

I was often surprised that the 'vote remain' people often couldn't answer simple questions. The biggest being with uncontrolled immigration (no possible way of capping a maximum) how do you plan for schools, hospitals, teachers, nurses. So you hear from teachers, day after day on the radio with these arguments and it becomes easy to vote out.

Then you have the popular radio 1 and other 'younger generation' tv shows, twitter, facebook, reddit etc that are posing the debate in a different light. Farage is an idiot (true.) Immigration is good, the EU is great and has done so much for us, we can fix the broken bits. Then it's much better to vote in.

A lot of people who voted remain did so because they were terrified that if the Tories had more power they would strip workers of their rights, decimate the NHS, privatise schools, etc etc (a lot of these things have nothing to do with the EU - sigh) so they voted in because they fear our own government!

Other people voted out because they hate our government - a sort of protest vote.

It's been a crazy time.

I am British, and I socialise with a whole host of young Brits who voted leave. A whole host of educated Engineers - software, civil, mech. A handful of NQT's, nurses, vets, doctors, and then a spattering of assorted jobs at large companies from banks to telecoms to charities to sales.

These are people I talk to one on one about all kinds of different issues - mostly philisophocal, rarely political - and they all had a few small things in common with the EU debate:

* a certainty that the UK is dying. There is less and less value here, and continuing with the current setup spells for a long slow death.

* an outright distrust of the political class and the media class. Most can cite cases where they have been outright knowingly lied to in ways most wouldn't realise.

* a feeling of betrayal by those screaming remain and insulting anyone who disagrees. These are people who were often close friends who just weren't the kind to get into the discussions we enjoyed.

So the obvious thing for these people to do? Vote leave. We can start the fight now and possibly survive, or delay it and definitely die. Why didn't they talk about it? They did. Just in places where there is no audience, only participants.

Social capital is a form of intangible value, as is cultural capital. The "technical middle class" (not my terminology) in the UK is usually described as relatively lacking both of these things for a group of its economic status: "Members of the class report the lowest number of social contacts of any of the classes, though these do tend to be high status, probably mostly other professional experts. It is relatively culturally disengaged with both highbrow and emerging culture." (Wikipedia)

From what you say I'm guessing you don't see the service sector as a viable form of "value" in the UK's economy, and maybe you also don't think of culture (creativity in the arts, or heritage and museums) as a form of renewable and intangible value? Whether that can support the UK entirely is another matter.

It's also a matter of socialization in the sociological sense. This is a fascinating concept for the slightly alienated among us to consider(!), even if you disregard what sociologists do with it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialization

The arts are a source of renewable and intangible value. This is well known and a cornerstone of the life I live. I would list my own interests but it would be largely masturbatory to do so.

Unfortunately the growth and sustenance of British culture is largely hamstrung by the London centric governance of the last forty years. In many ways the entire brexit can be seen as an anti-London situation (everywhere but London and Scotland vote out, Scotland are on the SNP line who are anti-London).

Know this. The best and the brightest all left the county I grew up in. They are told by their new peers that they should look down upon the places they came from.

There should be no surprise that when my peers write verse it doesn't dream of home or that when they colour canvas it doesn't reveal our fells.

But they will accompany to the local great garden, and sit upon the grass, and talk of love, confusion, hope, and futures.

I hope that you're really happy of the outcome of your vote. You destroyed uk and global economy, even if you still Don't realise it. A nation with narrow minded people that cannot understand the simple consequences of their actions will not have the most happy outcome.

I think the parent post did give reasons for his vote, rational and reasonable ones. I disagree with them mostly and voted a different way, but if one vote in one small country can destroy the global economy then it was in pretty bad shape anyway. Lehman Brothers would not have caused meltdown in a financially secure global system.

We must respect our democratic outcome and turn it to the best advantage of everyone.

Perhaps a more democratic Europe. It seems a goal we can get behind.

Edit: ok he did not say how he voted only "friends of his".

I didn't like the tone of the reply I gave to a sister comment of lifeisstillgood's comment and have since deleted it. In it I pointed out that I had not specified whether I had voted, or who for. This is what his edit refers to and was, like the rest of the comment, an unnecessary level of pedantry.

Of course I voted the same way as the friends I had been discussing this with for years.

Rereading this again, I am still annoyed by the pedantry argument. We try to have discussions and conversations here, try to be precise to make that process clearer - and dismissing such attempts is not helping the goals. So please, don't make throw away dismissals. And be ways of assuming people of course vote the same way as their friends.

You realize the same people predicting the destruction of the British economy all had their fingers in the tanking of the Greek economy and/or predictions of growth that were blatant lies? See eg IMF Greek debt sustainability analyses and their continued wild exaggerations of sustainability. So there's plenty of reason to doubt such predictions or assume they are politically motivated.

Recall how EU/Merkel treated Greece, a country too entangled to leave, and note Brown's decision to keep the pound sterling was prescient. That creates plenty of skepticism of the value of the EU.

https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2016/cr16130.pdf

The thing is, as a result of not being in the euro zone, the same sort of situation that Greece is in could not happen. In a way, it's really a disaster to have a monetary union without a fiscal union.

However, the main benefit of the EU is the single market, both in terms of goods locally as well as leverage for negotiating trade deals with other, non-European countries. That's going to be what hits them the hardest, because they won't get such a good deal, especially outside the EU

I posted clear facts that prove behind any reasonable doubt that uk economy will plummet. You can do all the predictions that you want, but if these are not based on facts then I will label them as fantasies and wishful thinking.

> I hope that you're really happy of the outcome of your vote. You destroyed uk and global economy, even if you still Don't realise it. A nation with narrow minded people that cannot understand the simple consequences of their actions will not have the most happy outcome.

Get a grip.

Has the UK economy been destroyed? No, the FTSE 100 dropped 3.15% on Friday, reacting to temporary uncertainty, and is up 1% on last week.

European markets fell far more, reflecting the fact they have more to lose from an acrimonious Brexit than the UK does.

What is narrow minded about voting to leave an anachronistic, sclerotic, anti-democratic political union, to which the UK contributes more money than it receives back, and from which the UK imports more than it exports to?

In all likelihood, the UK will leave the EU, but retain access to the single market through the EEA. This will enable us to enter into free trade deals with the rest of the world, which we are not able to do as EU members. There is nothing narrow minded about that.

> In all likelihood, the UK will leave the EU, but retain access to the single market through the EEA. This will enable us to enter into free trade deals with the rest of the world, which we are not able to do as EU members. There is nothing narrow minded about that.

You realize that most of the trade deals for the UK will not be favorable at all, right? As you mentioned, the UK has a negative trade balance.

If you voted for leave, you voted for the balkanization of Europe, and possibly the UK itself. History has proven time and time again that this is a bad and short-sighted idea (India/Pakistan partition, former Yugoslavian republics, Middle East, etc). It wouldn't surprise me if Canary Wharf suddenly relocated to Germany.

Actually negative trade balance allows you to get better terms than reverse. The country that export more has more to lose from tariffs and benefits more from lower rates.

The problem with being in the EEA is that you get all the negatives of being in the EU (free movement of people and paying into EU funds), but have no votes on how the money is spent.

This is a vast oversimplification.

See this paper [1] from the ASI which sets out the benefits of EEA membership over being a full member of the EU.

[1] http://www.adamsmith.org/evolution-not-revolution

3.15% in a single day while it triggered a massive destruction of European stock markets. The pound arrived to 1.33$, it was never at that level since 1985. 2000 people are being relocated from Morgan Stankey to Dublin or Frankfurt. Pretty much all the other banks are following the same plans. The financial services sector contributes for around 11% of the whole government tax income. Car industry is heading in the same direction. Even worse the uk won't secure any trade deal with Europe because the will want to discourage other nations to follow the same path. The damage to the uk and global economy will be huge, comparable to the 2008 crisis if not even worse. If someone doesn't get it I have all the rights of calling him narrow minded.

> 2000 people are being relocated from Morgan Stankey to Dublin or Frankfurt.

Sensationalist nonsense. Banks are considering long-term options for the worst case scenario if the UK leaves the single market. That is unlikely to happen.

> Even worse the uk won't secure any trade deal with Europe because the will want to discourage other nations to follow the same path.

The EU needs free trade with the UK more than UK needs it with the EU. The EU cannot afford to freeze the UK out.

As per the article the people that voted leave didn't really care about the consequences because they are at the bottom of the barrel already. So of course, they are not nice to fuck it up for every body else, but hey, they didn't setup a referendum in order to stay PM.

Parent is on topic and gives a slightly different perspective. I assume each of his friend had at least additional argument that probably align with one the messages of the Leave campaign as with the argument he listed most people would just stay home and not vote.

What is done is done, you better understand what those guys think because you will need their vote.

LoL. You could say exactly the same thing about the Remain campaign. Especially if you put yourself into e.g. the Greek position.

> Why didn't they talk about it? They did. Just in places where there is no audience, only participants

Isn't it interesting how many forms of public forums are not providing a greater venue for the exchange of ideas? As you implied, because of the one sided vitriol and group think on many public social media platforms, it tends to lead to suppression of dialogue.

As a professional, I am very worried about a ill-advised comment on social media having lasting consequences for my career. So I tend to avoid anything controversial.

For brexit, I've certainly held my tongue for fear of being permanently branded a racist by my colleagues. Chilling, when you think about it.

because of the one sided vitriol and group think

I can assure you, the vitriol was two-sided. Remain campaigners against Leave voters, Leave campaigners against non-British EU citizens.

That is very much two one sided situations.

> The biggest being with uncontrolled immigration (no possible way of capping a maximum)

It's not "uncontrolled immigration" - an American reading this can't just turn up in the UK and start living and working there. It's free movement of labour between EU member states.

The irony, which politicians who were pro-leave are starting to hint at, is that even having left the UK will have to agree to free movement in order to have access to the EU market. People who voted leave because they were angry about internal EU migration are going to be disappointed.

>It's free movement of labour between EU member states.

That distinction is kind of meaningless when thousands of people can enter several EU member states pretty much unregulated, then disappear under the radar and go anywhere within the EU.

UK is NOT a Schengen country. There's a border under British control.

That may be possible in, let's say, Belgium. Someone enters through the Italian border, somehow tricks the border patrol, and then can go with no problem from Italy to Belgium.

That's not the case for UK. On enter, you need to cross a border with officers, customs, etc. You can't even cross the border unnoticed through Ireland, as Ireland is also not a Schengen country (there's no border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, though there are sometimes checks from Police in buses and so on). There's a border also in Gibraltar...

The Brexit campaign was mainly complaining about workers from Eastern Countries like Poland or Romania, where they have the legal right to move and work in the UK, due EU accords. Plus fear that Turkey may enter in the future.

So why were all those migrants camped in Calais, and why are smugglers transporting them clandestinely?

If there are already smugglers transporting migrants... what has leaving the EU accomplished?

>It's free movement of labour between EU member states

I am certain that even the most compassionate proponent of diversity would find it difficult to call the tens of thousands (?) of individuals from Roma populations in for example Romania and Bulgaria who have arrived throughout West and Northern Europe the past couple of years in any way, shape or form, "labour" ("homeless" is more accurate). I don't blame these people; I blame the governments of Romania and Bulgaria who abandoned these people, thought of them as a "problem" and decided to punt that "problem" over to other member states.

And of course, "uncontrolled immigration" also implies "uncontrolled emigration". There are quite a few British expats in the rest of Europe who may find their new work permit status uncertain. (And who found it difficult to vote in the referendum).

The US little less than half the population of the EU and people can move anywhere at any time. Yet, 99% of the time it does not actually cause real issues with school planning.

So, I have trouble thinking this is your real issue?

In the US, we blame Mexican immigrants for school planning problems, language integration issues, etc. In the UK, they blame a variety of multilingual immigrants: immigrants from Poland to Pakistan.

We use strikingly similar scapegoating techniques in our political rhetoric.

Just a thought experiment. Imagine a world, where everyone can move anywhere in the world. What do you think it would happen ? Don't you think, that people in less prosperous countries would move to more richer countries. And what would that lead to, do you think people from richer countries wouldn't feel the hard impact on their economy ?

My point is this. In the USA, there are less cultural and economic differences between the states, so there won't be as many mass immigrations from one state to another. Now think about if USA decided over night, that it would open it's southern borders to all of South America, I think we all know what would happen.

And the same thing could happen in EU, because you get to huge cultural and economic differences on the borders of EU. Just think about Turkey and negotiations (their demands) to become part of EU. That would be a total disaster.

What good is EU or USA, if it can't keep ILLEGAL immigrants away ?

And then those people would repatriate funds, raising the quality of life in poorer countries and reducing the need to emigrate.

Labour is a tradable good, and as such the labour market must be an open as for any other goods (or services).

~3.5% of the US population is Illigal immigrants. If they want to come here they have. In fact over the last five years more people have moved from US to Mexico than Mexico to the US.

It's not really an issue because our 11 million illegal immigrants don't just desired to move to Montana they do what other people do and arrive in waves. Only issue US has with internal migration has to do with Job openings which are fairly easily to predict if hard to deal with. EX: Boom towns from fracking.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com