New UK Referendum Would Flip 'Brexit' Result of a Decade Ago, Poll Finds (independent.co.uk)
- Reference: 0183782588
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/26/06/13/0655247/new-uk-referendum-would-flip-brexit-result-of-a-decade-ago-poll-finds
- Source link: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-uk-second-referendum-b2993826.html
> Fifty-two percent of Britons think the UK should rejoin the EU, according to an Ipsos survey of 1,137 British adults conducted between May 14 and May 20. That's the inverse of the mood in June 2016 when a comparable share of the electorate backed Brexit... Younger voters overwhelmingly favor reversing Brexit, whereas half of those ages 55 and above oppose returning to the bloc.
"The number of people who say Brexit is going worse than they had predicted has almost doubled in the past five years," [2]reports The Independent , " from 27% in 2021 to 48% today — more than those saying it was going as well as or better than expected."
> [T]here is more backing for a second referendum, with 48 per cent now saying they would support one, against 27 per cent who would oppose it. Even a fifth of Reform UK voters and a quarter of those who voted Leave in 2016 would back a second vote, the study found.
[3]Tufts University discussed the last 10 years with the European Studies chair at their international relations graduate school:
> Q: Have their fears of negative financial effects been realized?
>
> A: The figures are quite revealing: The British GDP has been reduced by 6-8%, business investment has been reduced by 12%, and [4]trade volume has been reduced by 15% , compared to what it could have been if the U.K. had remained in the EU...
>
> Q: What do you think happens next?
>
> A: The United Kingdom made a choice and they might have the opportunity, at some point, to revise this choice. I hope that when they have to decide again, they will be much more informed.
[1] https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2026/06/09/872965.htm
[2] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-uk-second-referendum-b2993826.html
[3] https://now.tufts.edu/2026/06/08/10-years-after-brexit-vote-are-uk-residents-seeing-benefit
[4] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdrynjz1glpo
If I ruled .. (Score:5, Interesting)
If I ruled the EU, anyone leaving the EU must stay out for at least two decades. After that, the UK is welcome back but they must fit in. Euro as currency. Metric system. Drive on the right side of the road.
Sorry to all the nice and friendly people in the UK. But you need a few decades to try things that n your own. These things take time. Can't just hop off and on depending on the mood.
Re: (Score:3)
No idea why you'd want to say "you've got to stay out for 2 decades", but certainly "you've got to actually participate in the union if you want back in" is entirely reasonable, and I say that as a Brit.
Re:If I ruled .. (Score:4, Interesting)
> No idea why you'd want to say "you've got to stay out for 2 decades", but certainly "you've got to actually participate in the union if you want back in" is entirely reasonable, and I say that as a Brit.
Disclaimer: I'm American, so I'm coming from an outsider's perspective. For the record, I was opposed to Brexit.
The reason the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach is that you don't want asshole counties like Hungary (in the Viktor Orbán days) or the current leadership of Slovakia threatening to leave and/or cause havoc unless you buy them off. My personal opinion is that the UK should never be allowed back in to show that once you leave, you leave forever. I would make an exception for North Ireland in that if they choose to reunite with the Republic of Ireland, they should definitely be allowed to be part of the EU as part of the Republic of Ireland.
Re: (Score:3)
Meh, taking petty revenge doesn't make sense from a diplomatic stand point. The fact is that both the UK, and the EU have a lot to gain by trading with each other, and sharing regulations. Refusing to do that is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Dealing with countries like Orban's Hungary is easily doable by taking a much more nuanced approach than "once you leave you're done".
For example, the UK would hopefully learn its lesson about leaving because before they left, they had a privileged position
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit... I just noticed...
"€, 'blah' £, $!"
Did slashdot finally fix the stupid text encoding bug?
Re: (Score:2)
> Meh, taking petty revenge doesn't make sense from a diplomatic stand point. The fact is that both the UK, and the EU have a lot to gain by trading with each other, and sharing regulations. Refusing to do that is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
> If they were to do it again, and prove themselves to be abusing the mechanism, I'm sure the penalties would become much more harsh, and people would become much more reticent to let them back in.
The main reason for making rejoining the EU hard isn't a matter of revenge but practicality. Should a member be allowed to leave and then rejoin and then leave and then rejoin with no penalty? That would seem to be a really bad way to structure a union, a contract, or a business relationship.
> If they were to do it again, and prove themselves to be abusing the mechanism, I'm sure the penalties would become much more harsh, and people would become much more reticent to let them back in.
What's the difference among invoking the harsh penalties after the first time or the second time or the third time? Doing it after the second time seems just as arbitrary as after the first time.
Re: (Score:2)
You said what the difference is yourself. Leave, rejoin, leave rejoin, leave rejoin causes chaos and churn. Leave, rejoin can be a populace being tricked by right wing elements into making a dumb decision, and it's very unlikely that a country that's done that is going to re-leave after discovering how badly it turned out for them. Do you really think the UK would be likely to leave again any time in the next 50 years if they rejoined now, having discovered just how wrong the tories were, and just how ri
Re: (Score:2)
It would be a huge coup if we came back.
Re: (Score:1)
> The reason the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach is that you don't want asshole counties like Hungary (in the Viktor Orbán days) or the current leadership of Slovakia threatening to leave and/or cause havoc unless you buy them off.
That's not a credible scenario or risk. On thing that Brexit has shown the world is that it was a stupid fucking idea. Before 2016 there was endless talk of who would leave the EU. Nexit, Frexit, Hunexit, all were terms thrown around, and then after Brexit happened they all went instantly silent. All the right wing anti-EU nationalist political parties effectively scrapped the idea due to what a disaster it was, and support for the idea of leaving the EU plummeted in every country.
The threat is non-existent
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:3)
Unfortunately the EU has become a lot more than a trading coalition, that was the whole damn problem. No one had an issue with the EEC, then Mastricht happened which was a federalists wet dream. The EU is fundamentally undemocratic with the unelected commission making the rules and laws which the elected parliament get a yes no vote on. That's not democracy.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
Yes.
They don't get y make laws, only to vote on them.
And the.whole executive.branch is the Commission, anf they're not voted into power.
Re: (Score:2)
> the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach
No, because that way you give way too much power to a bunch of manipulating and manipulated idiots making a decision at a particular point in time.
Re: (Score:2)
>> No idea why you'd want to say "you've got to stay out for 2 decades", but certainly "you've got to actually participate in the union if you want back in" is entirely reasonable, and I say that as a Brit.
> Disclaimer: I'm American, so I'm coming from an outsider's perspective. For the record, I was opposed to Brexit. The reason the EU should insist on a minimum "stay out" time if not a "Once you leave, you NEVER get back in" approach is that you don't want asshole counties like Hungary (in the Viktor Orbán days) or the current leadership of Slovakia threatening to leave and/or cause havoc unless you buy them off.
> The thing people are arguing for is an endless number of Mulligans. Like Brexit every other year, then rejoining in the off years.
> Gotta be some limit, and after all, GB went hard Brexit, so they would need to make a really good case to get back in. Something along the lines of "we FAFO'd"
Re: (Score:2)
I think what happened to the UK, socially and economically, should be enough to deter anyone else from making the same mistake.
We are about to find out if I'm right, as Switzerland votes on a population cap that would screw up their relationship with the EU. They are not in the EU, but they have adopted some of it, like freedom of movement.
Re: (Score:2)
Presumably it's possible to have freedom of movement while still prohibiting people from establishing residence there. Crossing into Mexico from the U.S. is as hassle free as getting across the border (getting back in is another story) but if I tried to live there without authorization the Mexican government would deport me.
Re: (Score:2)
We tried a kamikaze Brexit, it didn't work. Let's hard a Hard Remain instead. Shengen, metric, the Euro, all of it.
It worked out really well for Ireland, it could do for us too.
Re: (Score:1)
It worked out really well for Ireland, it could do for us too.
What, be a tax haven for US-based multinationals so that they can pay less tax on profits made in other parts of Europe?
If you were to believe the politicians, the UK has performed at least on a par with the comparable economies within the EU since Brexit, yet according to these statistics made up by people with an interest in the UK rejoining the EU, it has been really poor "compared to what it could have been if the U.K. had remained
Re: (Score:2)
The official independent stats from the government, provided by the Office for Budget Responsibility, say that the UK is at least 4% worse off (in terms of GDP) than it otherwise would have been. Maybe 8% worse off.
While there have been a few economic indicators in the UK that performed okay against the rest of the EU at one time or another, the EU is made up of 27 member states, some of which are still coming up to Western European levels, and of course many of those indicators only really show that the ve
Re: (Score:2)
If I ruled the EU, anyone leaving the EU must stay out for at least two decades. After that, the UK is welcome back but they must fit in.
Well it's been almost a decade since we invoked article 50
Euro as currency.
Works for me.
Metric system.
We're mostly metric now. Exceptions being miles on roads, pints in the pub and how people talk. You can't legislate the latter. It would personally suck for me to go to kms because I learned miles at a formative age and it's hard to reprogram one's brain. They are a litt
Re: (Score:3)
OK, 10 years and you are back in. About Ireland, I will send someone over to fix this oversight.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
When you're done you'll need to head over to Malta and cyprus too.
Re: (Score:1)
A pint in a pub is "metric".
Nearly all Irish / British pubs in Germany sell pints. Either fake pints with 500ml content, but they write "pint" as headline over the drinks, or: real pints. 620ml.
You can name the stuff how ever you want, the point is that on the menu is clear: how many grams or ml that is.
What UK is doing inside of their country regarding measuring: no one cares. Relevant is if there is for example a web site that sells to France/Germany etc. and the measures "of what ever" make no sense ...
Re: (Score:3)
A UK pint is 568.261 ml
Re: (Score:1)
I guess it is fair to round it up to 569, or even 580ml then?
Pints in Thailand are 620, I assumed UK would be the same.
Re: (Score:3)
And let me tell you I get super pissy with the barman if he gives me 568.260.
The stingy bastard.
Re: (Score:3)
Our former colonies have all made the metric switch just fine. Canada's a bit confused because the building industry tends to be Imperial (or the US equivalents), but otherwise they're switched fine. As a Briton who emigrated to Canada as an adult and married an Aussie, before returning to the UK, I can attest to the fact that you can adjust. I don't do anything in miles anymore, even though I've been back in the UK almost 20 years. For a while I did low temperatures in celsius (I'd lived in Canada) and
Re: (Score:1)
Sweden changed from driving on the left to driving on the right. If I recall correctly, it was done with a relative minimum of head-on collisions, which settled down after a while.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
They already drove cars with the steering wheel on the left plus sweden had 1/10th population of the uk and traffic has increased somewhat since the 60s and the infrastructure costs would be in the 10s of billions.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't necessarily disagree (except maybe the side of road thing, it's far too late for any country to do that and it's a minor inconvenience.)
I would add another requirement: any referendum to join must have a supermajority. AND a supermajority must approve of any subsequent attempt to leave. Frankly Brexit should have had a supermajority to begin with - it was a major constitutional change, you don't do constitutional changes when the country is pretty much split 50/50, with a tiny majority in favor of o
Re: (Score:1)
Half of the nice people who voted for BREXIT will be dead then.
Half of the nice people who would vote next year to R-EU-JOIN, will be 40 when they could join again.
Your idea makes no sense at all ... unless you aim to keep them out forever.
Then: EU and EURO are two different things, and rightful so.
Re: (Score:2)
But Ireland, Malta and Cyprus can continue driving on the on the left? Would the province of Northern Ireland be given a special exemption? Seems fair given that it's already got half a foot in the EU already due to Boris's Brexit deal that sold them out and undermined British sovereignty with a line down through the Irish Sea. Or would you force a switch of sides when crossing the border? That would all seem to undermine the Good Friday Agreement though.
Two decades seems a bit arbritary, maybe even spi
Re: (Score:1)
> If I ruled the EU, anyone leaving the EU must stay out for at least two decades.
The ascension process takes a long time. If they voted to re-join now it'll have been 2 decades by the time it actually happens anyway.
> After that, the UK is welcome back but they must fit in. Euro as currency.
The significant concessions the UK got for joining the EU are not on the table. They were unique to the situation of the day - due to the economic train wreak they were at the time. Make no mistake if they rejoined in the EU it'll be on the same terms as every other member nation at this point. That said...
> Metric system. Drive on the right side of the road.
The UK had all required metric systems adopted. That included showing
Re: (Score:2)
I think that is a bit crass. I would advocate that we let them back in, at the same conditions everybody gets, but they do not get any votes for the first 10 years.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
You forgot a crucial element: after at least twenty years passed, they then have to re-apply from scratch.
Re: (Score:2)
...but you don't.
The current rules are that the UK could apply to join the EU. The UK would have to go thru the entire qualification process like any other nation applying to join the EU. It would be an excellent lesson in FAFO.
Re: If I ruled .. (Score:2)
This is the wonderful about democracy. You don't have to wait for 20 years if you change your mind. Most country let you do that every 4-5 years.
Racism. (Score:5, Interesting)
The entire original argument for Brexit was based on racist nationalism.
They wanted to kick the foreigners out (while still letting their own elite vacation in Europe).
They claimed that the UK could get better treaties than the Europeans did. (because the UK politicians were 'superior' to the Europeans)
They claimed that they could reduce regulations because those darn foreigners were making stupid regulations (they weren't).
They were tired of those foreigners telling them what to do (national sovereignty).
The truth is:
Foreigners do not go places unless they can get jobs, which increases your economy. They are cheap labor for you to exploit, not a drain on your economy.
The larger your country/organization is, the better treaties you can negotiate.
Regulations exist because either they help your people or they help your existing corporations. Otherwise they go away.
Having foreigners telling you what to do is well worth it if YOU can also tell the foreigners what to do. Uniformity of rules makes everything easier. It is only a problem if they do not let you help make the rules.
Re: (Score:2)
This is true. The "legitimate concerns" are legitimate, e.g. availability of housing, but they are targeting the wrong people. It's the billionaire fucks who told them to commit brexicide that are causing the problems, not immigrants.
The worst part is that even after it was revealed that Farage got 5 million quid for delivering Brexit, these muppets don't seem to have realized that it's just more evidence he isn't working in their interests. He's working for the billionaires who have made him fabulously wea
Re: (Score:2)
> The worst part is that even after it was revealed that Farage got 5 million quid for delivering Brexit
the collective amnesia about boris is remarkable ... is that a british thing?
and i don't mind the uk now br-entering the eu at all but it's no less comical. that wreck will have sunk by then anyway.
News for nerds? (Score:1)
Lol racism had nothing to do with it
Living in the UK myself, people stopped caring about race from Gen X onwards
What was happening at the time was a large influx of people from poland (white not black)
bearing in mind this is legal migration with proper paperwork, not rubber boats
Business's tend to hire people who are willing to work at the cheapest rates
so they were out competing areas such as local UK workers in the building industry then sending the money home.
Then stories started to ciculate of factories
Re: (Score:2)
> Lol racism had nothing to do with it
> Living in the UK myself, people stopped caring about race from Gen X onwards
Are you actually living in the UK? Or hiding in your basement int he UK and never leaving your house. Let me guess, you're a white male.
Racism is fucking rampant in the UK. Has been for a long time. You pretending it doesn't exist or pretending it wasn't a deciding factor for some people is just ignorant. Go and explore your own country and get out of the house a bit. Ideally go with a black or Indian friend (you have those right?), or someone named Ahmed. Maybe after witnessing what it's like first hand yo
Re: News for nerds? (Score:2)
Dont expect to get modded up for telling the truth. It makes libtards feel good to blame everything on racism even when as you say the immigration issue was with white Europeans at the time.
Re: (Score:2)
"Foreigners do not go places unless they can get jobs" ...or they can live off social security paid or they can make money from crime, all while pushing their religion over that of the over-tolerant locals who fund them. Forever.
Re: (Score:1)
All that trouble and they still haven’t done a thing about the pikeys.
Re: Racism. (Score:2)
Back in reality, UK got neither of those things. They got violent, erosive illiterates who hate Western culture and values flooding their social systems AND their economy is tanking like a rock thrown off a cliff.
Nooooo, well, okaysure. (Score:2)
I work in medical device localization and in the past 10 years it's been one redo after another between the EU MDR initiative and then the UK sort of adopting the same for UKCA. It's been a whirlwind of ever changing regulations to get this sorted properly.
So why the hell not undo all of that and go back to a unified regulatory system? I didn't really have any plans for *checks 'to do' list* the next 10 years
Fun Fact: The initial MDR deadline was 12/2020 and does anyone remember what happened in 2020!?
Re: Nooooo, well, okaysure. (Score:3)
All I hear you say is Job Security. Nothing to complain about :)
Polls don't vote (Score:2)
I don't know about the United Kingdom but in the United States we have heavy-duty voter suppression done at the county level that makes it basically impossible for close elections to be won by anyone else but the candidate backed by the Epstein class.
The UK adopted all the shitty tricks that America did, their ruling class was all over Epstein Island too after all.
So I can't imagine they don't just use the same tricks to make sure people can't vote when they're not supposed to. Maybe it was just a l
Re: (Score:2)
The UK mostly doesn't do voter suppression. However, they did for the Referendum. Basically, anyone who might not be racist was not permitted to vote.
Even then, 48% still insisted on staying in the EU.
One of the reasons the UK doesn't do voter suppression the way the US does is because (until very recently) the House of Lords had a lot of people in it who owed no favours at all to the political elite but did have a huge responsibility to making sure that things functioned in the long term. This has since be
Re: Polls don't vote (Score:2)
> I don't know about the United Kingdomâ¦
Then let me teach you a British saying: wind your neck in.
Brexit will be a long-term good (Score:1)
Instead of the UK's racism continuing to simmer, they got a good lesson in the fact that they're not really better than anyone else and they made a damn stupid decision.
When they rejoin (which long term seems like a pretty reasonable assumption), they're going to have to rejoin as equal partners which means not with the special rights they had last time. Which is good for the EU (including, ultimately, a rejoined UK).
Without Brexit the UK would have continued in its privileged position which is objectively
Won't happen. (Score:3)
Yes the British public may now be in favour of rejoining but it's only because they're still deluding themselves into thinking the European Union will let them rejoin on the same terms they left on, i.e. with exemptions from giving up the Pound and adopting the Euro or joining the passport-free Schengen Area. That's not on the table and it never will be. The United Kingdom had the best possible deal with the EU but wanted more. They played a game of chicken with the referendum but screwed themselves when it went 52/48 in favour of leaving when everyone expected to be the other way around.
Then of course there's the issue of democracy. Any time any further referendum on this is proposed you're told "we already voted on this" and "you're just trying to thwart democracy". The powerful forces who wanted the UK out of the EU got the result they wanted by promising the left behind communities a bevy of treasures if they just voted leave and now they have not only will they not get those treasures but they will never be consulted again. We had democracy once and that's enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody in the UK thinks they're going to get the sweetheart deal. What's going on here is the younger people want to rejoin because they want access to the jobs that are available on the continent and the older people don't want to rejoin because they don't want to have to open the United Kingdom up to widespread immigration and they think staying out of the EU protects them from that.
As usual the old people are wrong because if it's one thing old people are good at it's being wrong. The purpose of the
Re: (Score:2)
> Nobody in the UK thinks they're going to get the sweetheart deal.
Do you really believe that? Seriously? Given the intelligence of the average voter? I actually live in Stoke-on-Trent, the famed Brexit capital of Britain, and trust me there are plenty of people who genuinely think the EU is bluffing and we can just bully them into making an exception for us. After all, we're special! They'll do it for us! It's the same mentality that got us in to that game of chicken I mentioned. We Brits have a very unhealthy and unrealistic attitude towards the rest of Europe and I thin
Re: (Score:2)
> They played a game of chicken with the referendum
They didn't. There was nothing wrong with having a referendum. The referendum was advisory and not legally binding in any way. What they did, was make some insanely fucking stupid decisions based on the outcome of a referendum that showed no clear support for undertaking such a monumental national change.
In sane countries referendums which are non-binding with these results wouldn't be acted on.
In sane countries referendums which are binding would require both a significant majority (66% or 75% support) as
Re: (Score:2)
We won't get the old deal back, but I see that as a benefit. As for the Euro, I'd join but the reality is that the requirement to join is not at all enforced. If a country does nothing to actually adopt it, nothing happens. Several other countries haven't bothered.
Made up numbers (Score:4, Insightful)
I too can make up numbers about an economy regarding what might have happened if something that happened didn't happen. Pretty hard to tell me I'm wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually it would be easy to tell you you're wrong if you make up numbers. Economic analysis is a thing that happens, and you can trend the effect of changes in trading policies between countries in relation to those countries trading with others to determine the economic impact of your policies.
You not understanding something doesn't make it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
What are the error bars.
If someone pretending to be a scientist tells you a number like this and can´t tell you the error, they are a social scientist pushing bullshit.
Exceptional deal (Score:1)
The UK already had the exceptional deal for EU membership, had the delusion that they could get an even better deal, found out they were wrong and will likely really dislike the standard terms of rejoining the EU in the future.
Ideally the EU would just let them back in with their old deal. But I doubt that the EU will be so generous.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody in the EU wants these assholes back at their old conditions. They will probably habe to accept conditions worse than usual.
Re: (Score:2)
Nowadays there is no cherry-picking rules for new members. The Euro and Schengen are mandatory. And a lot of other stuff too.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. It would still be a massive advantage for the UK to get back in.
Yeah, no shit. (Score:2)
Brexit happened on lies upon bloody lies by populist douchebags like Nigel Farage. The British people were once again screwed over epic style by the political class. Which made things even worse after Brexit, ironically.
We all knew Brexit would hurt, but holy cow, as much as we like to make fun of the Brits for doing Brexit, this is painful to watch. We feel you guys.
coulda (Score:2)
"compared to what it could have been if the U.K. had remained in the EU"
Could. If only pigs could fly.
Many young and foolish realise they made a mistake (Score:3)
The day after the Brexit vote I stood in the coffee queue in my office and heard a young man tell his friend behind me that he voted to leave because he thought it was funny and wasn't taking it seriously. I felt like punching him. I hope he is one of the ones who regrets his vote now.
Re: Many young and foolish realise they made a mis (Score:3)
The day after the referendum there was a spike in Google searches for "what is the EU?". Not the day before, the day after .
These people live among us.
Re: (Score:2)
These people are actually a large group of the population. Cretins that understand nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
There was an episode of Question Time (a QA session with politicians and the public), and a woman said, on national TV, that she voted for Brexit because of bendy bananas.
Bendy bananas is one of the oldest, most frequently debunked myths about the EU. The claim is there is a crazy EU law that costs retailers money, regulating the curvature of bananas. There are actually rules about bananas... But they were written by the UK. They became a de facto standard, and the EU adopted them FROM US.
The level of ignor
Re: (Score:1)
That is actually how the vote turned out.
A big deal of votes where young people doing fun votes, because they never could imagine that BREXIT would win.
There where we "vote for BREXIT" student parties ...
Re: (Score:2)
I hope these repulsive idiots suffer. Maybe some of them will learn that decisions have consequences. Although probably most will not.
Have your cake it and eat it too? (Score:5, Interesting)
Dig just a little deeper, and the full story flips the article. British support for reverting Brexit drops sharply into negative territory if that specifically means losing out on its previous carve-outs like keeping the pound, keeping border controls, and keeping immigration controls. For example, yougov then puts rejoin support at around 36%, with opposition at 45%. But the majority of polled EU folks oppose such carve outs for Britons.
See [1]https://yougov.com/en-gb/artic... [yougov.com]
[1] https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/52523-western-europeans-would-support-the-uk-rejoining-the-eu
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't surprising, but I know what the best offer they're likely to get is.
Re: (Score:1)
Dude, obviously UK will have border controls.
THEY WOULD BE AT THE BORDER OF THE EU ... how dumb are you?
It is a damn island. Of course they will have border controls.
And no one cares if they keep the pound, or what ever.
POUND and EURO are damn currencies, and have nothing to do with the EU.
Neither has Schengen anything to do with the EU.
This are contracts that only overlap a (some) certain area(s) of Europe.
You are free to choose, if the others agree, if you join the EU zone, or Schengen, or not.
And as a bo
On the other hand... (Score:2)
48% still think it was a good decision. With a population this abysmally stupid, a country has no future.
Re: (Score:2)
Fewer do now, the older, largely Brexit-voting democratic, has diminished over the last decade.
Nothing happens next (Score:2)
because all Eu memebers would have to agree and that's not going to to happen particuarily if that fuckwit Farage wins or there is a rightwing colitation because they would want out again.
Nobody cares (Score:4, Interesting)
Not in the EU at least, they can change their mind as often as they want, but as they themselves said many, many times:
Brexit means Brexit.
As long as there's a veto, they won't become a member again.
First, because SOMEBODY would veto their ass and second.
NOBODY will ever want a UK member with a veto.
We learned our lesson.
Also, the EU that the UK left is not the EU from today, the EU finalized tons of regulations and rulings that the UK had been blocking for DECADES.
Good riddance!
Of course (Score:2)
Of course it would as the brexit campaign was full of lies, even the campaigner admitted that after brexit was put into motion.
Europe does not want them back (Score:2)
I doubt Europe would want the UK back with everything that is going on, with the current state of the UK and the mass enrichment and mass surveillance and all the violence and all the many other issues.
UK made their bed, let them sleep in it now, and be a glaring warning to the rest of Europe.
In a decade or two we can see what is left and if it is worth taking back.
Decline (Score:2)
UK has been in decline, with overpopulation and underinvestment and corruption since the 1950s.
We were told that joining the EU would save us, but the decline continued, then we were told that Brexit would save us, but the decline continued. Now idiots are saying rejoining EU will save us.
Re: Decline (Score:2)
Dd iyou forget the 30 years or so after joining the EU that the UK flourished?
The UK suffered after the dot-com bust and to compensate they borrowed and borrowed. Suffered heavily from the 2008 financial crisis and it borrowed and borrowed some more...
Maybe the problem was with those that were pushing solutions that did not treat the problem?
The UK today has such severe problems that even a Labour government is forced to take austerity measures.
There's a lot of pomp, arrogance and bravado amongst so
Re: (Score:2)
Although there is a right join, no far right join has ever been defined and there's no signs that it would in fact be possible.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Except the USA must reform the following laws before that happens:
1. Eliminate binding arbitration in consumer contracts.
2. Eliminate Employment-at-Will and replace it with Just Cause.
3. Eliminate noncompete agreeements in employment contracts.
4. Move to a single-payer health care system
5. Implement a 48 hour maximum working time for non-mangerial employees.
6. Eliminate taxation of Expats if they are outside of the United States
7. Implement "Trading Standards" in a similar fashion that the UK does.
8. Implem
Re: (Score:2)
You're picking nits on an imaginary solution for a mostly imaginary, dare I say fake, problem. Even if they're large and interesting nits.
So my imaginary solution approach to the dimensional collapse on the profit dimension would be a progressive profits tax related to market share. Main area of overlap with your ideas is probably the third one, where one of the ways to detect monopoly status is the lack of freedom of employees to switch to a competing company.
Re:UK (Score:5, Interesting)
America and the UK have very little in common even if they often think otherwise. Look, for example, at the overwhelming support for state run healthcare, and consumer rights, with pro-active enforcement, etc. Culturally they're not close either. Despite language differences, the UK is much closer to most European countries in culture, attitude towards government, and so on.
Re: (Score:3)
We have a deal, a fantastic deal, and I am sure the UK is definitely going to sign it this weekend, no more discussions but a great deal, this weekend. For sure.
Re: (Score:2)
> We have a deal, a fantastic deal, and I am sure the UK is definitely going to sign it this weekend, no more discussions but a great deal, this weekend. For sure.
It's a beautiful deal, I mean everyone is talking how perfect it is, and only I can broker perfect deals.. But lets talking about old Slee[py Joe, he's teh one who rigged The great country of Britain's did I tell you how much I lobe Britain, And they love me oh so much, but Everyone loves me - I love inflation and will arrest Hillary Clinton - who received no votes in 2016, and I'm naming all the buildings in Washington DC after me because everyone loves me, I'm the best president, love love love. Time for
Re: (Score:2)
Tell me you have absolutely no clue about politics and history without telling me.
Seriously, with a mind this dim, how do you manage to tie your shoelaces?
Flipping an effective tie (Score:5, Insightful)
Flipping an effective tie, from 52-48 to 48-52 ?
Yes, that will settle the argument once and for all.
Re: (Score:2)
Haven't looked at this poll result specifically, but the general trend atm is ~50/35/15 rejoin/stay out/don't know.
Re: (Score:1)
This is what made the entire situation so absurd. Worst of all it was a non-binding referendum. You don't take drastic measures on a simple majority like that. Most sane countries act on referendums only when there's a clear significant majority, as well as at least a simple majority in every state.
The UK should really be commended for their incredible display of political incompetence.
Re: Flipping an effective tie (Score:2)
You do if you said you d said beforehand you d honour the result like cameron did.
Re: (Score:3)
No you don't. If a politician said something, then his lips were moving.
Re: (Score:2)
100%
Re: (Score:2)
but but brexiters claimed it was a huge and and clear majority mandate of the will of the people.