(25-06-2016 13:02 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ]Good post Wackawoo. Just one thing though - We are one of the biggest net contributors to the EU so in fact there will be less money available for distribution by the EU. If they want to keep up the same level of expenditure within the remaining 27 then they will have to pay more between them. That will not go down well in Germany and France in particular where both governments face elections in the next 16 months and internally have difficulties with far right anti-immigration political parties.
Do you know what, I thought that when I saw it, It did say there would be 18% less money going into the EU without Britian, I assume becasue Uk was such a big contributer, they would have to give a lot more back to the UK. They did give %, I cannot remeber the correct total and I doubt it will be on you tube (it was on BBC) but it was somehting like Germany gets 22% back now but will get 25% back after the UK leave; may be there weren't allowing for the increase in expense they weill have, which might take that 25% down to 20%.
Overall it was trillions, about 3 trillion UK has spent on the EU, but it was late, maybe they will repeat it sometime during the day.
^ Well this should be interesting because I don't know if the EU has the authority to hold discussions with Scotland as they are not an independent country. Can you imagine what would happen if they held discussions with Catalonia? So the Spanish Government may well protest in Scotland's case as they would not wish to give the Catalonians ideas by setting a precedent.
I presume Scotland in any case would have to prove they met all the criteria for membership and I have no idea if they do. I'm not sure how this worked for the Czech Republic & Slovakia when they became independent.
Finally all 27 remaining members have the right of veto.
See the 6 Already to play hardball already saying to get on with it but thing is we are the ones in control at the moment
(25-06-2016 13:12 )SecretAgent Wrote: [ -> ]^ Well this should be interesting because I don't know if the EU has the authority to hold discussions with Scotland as they are not an independent country. Can you imagine what would happen if they held discussions with Catalonia? So the Spanish Government may well protest in Scotland's case as they would not wish to give the Catalonians ideas by setting a precedent.
That's a good point, they'ed have to leave the Uk first and then discuss with EU, I assume thats what she means by options, seeing if she can cut a deal with EU first and then declare a referendum, the EU might look upon it as more opputunaty to punish England.
But the, nearly 40% did vote to leave the EU in scotland, people might think it's an easy decission to vote out of UK and then into EU, but they will no longer be from Great Brtitian or British, where this idea might be great for the nationalist a lot of Scots might not like that idea. Plus i think i heard they'd have to have the Euro.
(25-06-2016 11:55 )mysterion Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think there will ever be a true Brexit. The whole thing will get watered down, so that we have a close agreement with the EU and accept their laws, but are not actually a member. The Brexit will be a technicality more than anything and not a huge amount will change.
I don't think it will happen at all.
Because the leaving process takes years it means a lot of people who voted Leave will be dead by then. Apparently 400 Leave voters are dying every day. Then you've got more new voters every day who reach the age of 18 and we keep being told that these are overwhelmingly Remain voters.
So basically before the whole thing is finalised I can't see why there wouldn't be a second referendum. It would be crazy not to have a second referendum, because how can people be held to a vote which took place years before?
thought it was 950 a day
and it was just basic statistics not real
but that logic is flawed because when people reach 50 they decide to vote brexit
And what happens if we have a 2nd and Remain win 51-48 we will have to have a third best out of 3 then best out of 5,7,9
(25-06-2016 13:32 )the downtrodden Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think it will happen at all.
Because the leaving process takes years it means a lot of people who voted Leave will be dead by then. Apparently 400 Leave voters are dying every day. Then you've got more new voters every day who reach the age of 18 and we keep being told that these are overwhelmingly Remain voters.
So basically before the whole thing is finalised I can't see why there wouldn't be a second referendum. It would be crazy not to have a second referendum, because how can people be held to a vote which took place years before?
You need to bare in mind nearly 40% of young poeple voted leave, it simpley isn't young vs old has the press are trying to make it out. A lot of those young people could have been swayed by all the scarmongering tactics.
You're also not allowing for the other alternative, what if, when the initial shock is over, in a couple of years time there has been no war in europe, the sky didn't fall in, the markets and pound have recovered and there is not only no percievable difference to their every day lives, but it might be slightly better, young people might then think, you know what, this leavings not been too bad at all.
There are lots of figures flying around about the age profile of voters. I think I'm right in saying these are all extrapolations or pre or maybe post vote surveys and should therefore be treated with caution.
(25-06-2016 13:32 )the downtrodden Wrote: [ -> ]It would be crazy not to have a second referendum, because how can people be held to a vote which took place years before?
You could argue that is what we just did. A second chance for people who had no say in 1975.