Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Valmy]

[The Minsky Moment]

This is what the prime minister's spokesman said about the cabinet meeting.

She said she is committed to securing a Brexit that delivers on the referendum result, safeguards jobs and security and which preserves our union.

Solution: EEA.  Does all those things.
Problem solved.

[Valmy]

Ok I find this confusing. Are they bound to leave the EEA as part of the Article whatever that they invoked? Or is it just assumed they would?

[Tamas]

Ok I find this confusing. Are they bound to leave the EEA as part of the Article whatever that they invoked? Or is it just assumed they would?

The whole point of this shitstorm was to TAKE BACK TEH CONTROL. You can't take control back with the EEA.

There is, apparently, a golden age of richdom waiting for us as soon as we can drop tariffs on US stuff from like 2% to 0%. EEA is not an option.

[Valmy]

Ok the UK has got to stop being compared to Trump. Trump has not been this stupid with regards to trade, He blusters and postures and then changes very little. The UK is pointlessly self-destructive.

[The Minsky Moment]

The whole point of this shitstorm was to TAKE BACK TEH CONTROL. You can't take control back with the EEA.

The impossible trinity is economic stability, no intra-UK Irish border, and respect the results of the referendum. EEA actually does all three.
The referendum answered exactly one question: should the UK leave the EU?  Withdrawing from the EU and re-entering EEA does that.

"Take back control" is a slogan, not a result. It is also completely meaningless. "Control" is not defined. Events of the past two years certainly indicate that a decision to leave does not increase "control" in any meaningful way however defined.

If Brexit proponents meant something greater or different than simply exiting the EU, that should have been specified in the referendum.  It wasn't so there is no valid objection to EEA.

It's true that EEA membership outside the EU is entirely dominated in game theory terms by membership in the EU but that just shows that voting leave was a bad idea.  EEA is the best of all remaining available alternatives and the only one that meets May's criteria.

[Valmy]

What is the probability of that scenario playing out Minsky? Because that would be a rather Trumpian result.

[Barrister]

A lot of the motivation for Brexit though was over free movement of people - many voters apparently wanted more control over who enters the country.  Membership in the EEA means allowing EU and EEA members fulls rights to enter the UK and reside there.

[Valmy]

A lot of the motivation for Brexit though was over free movement of people - many voters apparently wanted more control over who enters the country.  Membership in the EEA means allowing EU and EEA members fulls rights to enter the UK and reside there.

But, as Minsky says, nothing in the referendum specifically said anything about that.

[garbon]

A lot of the motivation for Brexit though was over free movement of people - many voters apparently wanted more control over who enters the country.  Membership in the EEA means allowing EU and EEA members fulls rights to enter the UK and reside there.

But, as Minsky says, nothing in the referendum specifically said anything about that.

Indeed, nothing in the actual vote was about what 'Brexit' must look like. Just that they didn't want Britain to be an EU member state.

[garbon]

But witless May...

[The Minsky Moment]

A lot of the motivation for Brexit though was over free movement of people - many voters apparently wanted more control over who enters the country. 

Then there should have been a referendum about that.

[Tamas]

The whole point of this shitstorm was to TAKE BACK TEH CONTROL. You can't take control back with the EEA.

The impossible trinity is economic stability, no intra-UK Irish border, and respect the results of the referendum. EEA actually does all three.
The referendum answered exactly one question: should the UK leave the EU?  Withdrawing from the EU and re-entering EEA does that.

"Take back control" is a slogan, not a result. It is also completely meaningless. "Control" is not defined. Events of the past two years certainly indicate that a decision to leave does not increase "control" in any meaningful way however defined.

If Brexit proponents meant something greater or different than simply exiting the EU, that should have been specified in the referendum.  It wasn't so there is no valid objection to EEA.

It's true that EEA membership outside the EU is entirely dominated in game theory terms by membership in the EU but that just shows that voting leave was a bad idea.  EEA is the best of all remaining available alternatives and the only one that meets May's criteria.

There you go with logics again.

[Zoupa]

EEA is not going to happen. The tories are more concerned with their byzantine plots and powerplays than good governance.

I'm 90% sure of a no-deal Brexit at this point. I'm one of the 6 ppl who voted "Other European - Leave" in the original poll of this thread so I'm quite fine with it. I've despised the UK's european attitude ever since Thatcher's "I want my money back", so fuck them.

What was the result of the Scottish referendum, 40-45% voted for independence? Give it 5 years of no-deal Brexit and the next one will be 55-60% voting for independence.

You reap what you sow, stupid rosbiffs.

[garbon]

What was the result of the Scottish referendum, 40-45% voted for independence? Give it 5 years of no-deal Brexit and the next one will be 55-60% voting for independence.

Of course, they'd pretty fucking stupid given that Scotland is incredibly deep in debt and can't stand on its own two feet.