I view it as an experiment in what happens when common sense fails to win in an election.
I'm a EU citizen and Brexit will have negative impact, but I really want them to see this through, preferably in a no deal fashion.
I want to see what happens. Was it realy project Fear, or - what I belive - this will spell total shit for UK for comming years and decades.
I see it as that combined with a poor electoral system. Common sense wasn't on offer from either major party at the last General Election, the main party offering it is now rather minor and considered tainted through the last coalition, and others (Green etc) are tiny.
The small parties are held in check by our antiquated First Past The Post voting system which disenfranchises all votes but the winner in a given area.
So people are faced with the old dilemma - I'd like to vote for C or D really, but if I don't vote for A, B is likely to get in, and I hate B. I really hate B!
> Was it realy project Fear
There was definitely an element of fearmongering, and there has been ridiculous hyperbole on both sides of the argument. I believe outcomes will be a net negative, but also that you can't really take anyone's forecast seriously.
As interesting as the "lesson" of a no-deal would be (and it would be shit because France or Ireland can't just keep the border wide open as it is without getting sued by the EU, the majority of the UK voters are coming to realize that it is a stupid idea and has to be prevented. What has to change is this toxic english press that wrote so many lies about the EU for decades.
It doesn't have to be a disaster; the separation of Czechoslovakia was comparatively easier!
It is a disaster of choice due to lack of coherent planning. The government position makes no sense - why are we trying to leave the customs union too?
The EU membership brought benefits. It should not be surprising that leaving it is disadvantageous.
Russia leaving the Internet would cost them a lot more if they had a tech industry and weren't a non free petrostate.
Look at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47213842 for example.
It will be total shit because those who most vocally backed Brexit are amongst the first relocating themselves and their businesses. Like Britain's richest Jim Ratcliffe, Dyson etc.
The EU has been trying to force airlines to become majority EU owned. That's not a "pool" that's being "used". It's a simple economic attack in retaliation for leaving.
The EU also tried to force euro clearing out of London again, although it appears they just gave up on that and ESMA decided the EU would allow it to continue in the UK. Which is odd because losing the financial passport was supposed to spell certain doom for the Euro clearing market, but apparently it wasn't that easy for the EU to forcibly relocate all that business. Being able to sell services to people in Europe is not a pool - it's the absence of artificial blockades.
The EU is doing or threatening to do lots of things that aren't comparable to a sports club. In fact it would appear that most of the "benefits" of EU membership appear to merely be the absence of various forms of economic attack. There's no technical reason why the EU has to implement these policies after all. It's just that if they didn't impose artificial penalties on non-members, membership would be even less attractive than it already is.
Doesn't, to me, seem an economic attack. A non EU carrier can still fly to and from the EU. It merely potentially limits flying slots within the EU. Want to fly Paris to Madrid route, be an EU carrier. That seems to hold with the analogy. Pretty sure US and other nations have limits on internal routes too.
Incidentally, in preparation for a no deal farce, Ryanair are reregistering some planes in the UK to still have the option of flying our few internal routes.
I truly believe this spells the beginning of the end of us as a center for business and finance.