Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Orlanth wrote:

Big trouble is in 2014 oil was $110 a barrel, not its under $50.

And? Scotland is economically viable on its own.

 Orlanth wrote:

1. Gibraltar doesn't want to be be part of Spain,

As of the last referrendum, who knows what the situation will be in 5 years? 10 years? 20?

 Orlanth wrote:


1. Gibraltar doesn't want to be be part of Spain, that overides all other consdierations and is the reason they voted remain, not a love of Brussels

2. A micronation is untenable, .

This is true, and anyone who knows anything about the place or the mentality of the people will know it. Their economy is primarily built around the port, which the royal navy, american navy, and cruise ships will continue to use regardless. If they tried to join the EU separately, their banking sector would lose out in comparison to Luxembourg, and restrictions are tightening up anyway. Their primary concern is the border being slowed to six hour waits again, but to an extent, they're used to that. They're remarkably well shielded against economic fluctuations, remain or leave.

jouso wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I don't think it's as bad as all that.

I think a fair number of Brexit voters have woken up today and, after the initial euphoria of winning, have begun to think quietly "WTF have we done?" Anyone going on holiday on the next few weeks is being hit in the wallet right now, for example.

The Boris is apparently one of them.

"Boris Johnson has said there is “no need for haste” and “nothing will change over the short-term” as he said the country should not immediately trigger Article 50 to start exit negotiations with the EU."

https://next.ft.com/content/eab50f6b-480c-36a7-b566-9d63d6bab2ea

I didn't expect cold feet this early.

Dont make rushed moves with nations futures. We have two years to finalise the process.

1. Let the market scare settle, this will happen when people think they cant call any more short term profit on the issue and is of itself independent of the real economy.

2. Listen to the feedback. Merkel is calling for amiable and reasonable trade terms, so when we do talk, we talk to her first.

3. See whom are negotiating partners are. For example Obama haters the Uk anyway and wantsd to see us burn, but he wont be president for long. Trump actually supports Brexit, Clinton is more likely next president and plays her cards differently.
There is no point ior need to negotiate with the US in particular until January.

4. Know who our own decision makers are. It wont be Cameron for long, and likely not Corbyn either.
Chukka Umunna, Andy Burnham, IDS and Boris Johnson are new power players and their pieces are not in position yet.

Indeed. Ironically, a British attitude of "keep calm and carry on" along with a measured level headed way forward is what's needed.

Rushing leads to calamity, lets get the new players in place in every location and then begin talks, negotiations and the game of politics

 Ketara wrote:

This is true, and anyone who knows anything about the place or the mentality of the people will know it.

Things change, the (very faint) prospect of a united Ireland has been raised in the first time in over a century, who could have for seen that coming?

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

kb_lock wrote:
Without fear mongering, did we just watch the death of Britain?

Scotland wanted to stay in the eu, which is why they stayed in gb, that would absolutely be cause for a new referendum for them.

That is a given that the SNP will demand another referendum. Westminster can point to the last one and say this is a once a generation event.
You cant change government 'mid term', just because you dont like policy changes.
... ....

By Cameron resigning the UK is changing government 'mid term' because we don't like the policy. There will be a new prime minister when he goes and the new PM will appoint a new cabinet.

This is one reason why I think a general election is advisable before cracking on with Brexit. It would offer Scotland the chance to make plain their desire for independence and EU membership by electing 100% SNP MPs with a good margin.

Westminster FPTP elections are awful for determining the will of the people, that's the very point of referendums. At the Scottish elections we put a pro-indy majority in Holyrood using a system of proportional representation, that is who will speak for us now, and it will be through a referendum that we ourselves will speak.

Dismay seems to be quickly turning to resolve up here - even my postie greeted me this morning with a gak-eating grin and "indyref2 eh? haha"

 Bottle wrote:
Today is a terrible result for the UK.

Even with the best intentions the Leave result today has put in motion the dissolution of the UK as Scottish secession is now the likely outcome.

We're likely to see a second Scottish referendum before October when Article 50 will be submitted by the new PM. I say, good on the Scots - but this is a terrible day for the rest of us.

October is unlikely. It's more probable we'll see the Scottish Government open up lines direct to the EU to clarify everything first, then call the referendum closer to the end of the UK's negotiation period assuming they can get an assurance of rapid accession in the event of a Yes vote.

They are both awful.

FPTP produced a Tory majority government with only 36% of the votes.

The Scottish Referendum produced a 55 to 45 % against result, but is now being ignored by people like you, because now a different referendum has given a result that can be seen to conflict and produces a situation more to your taste.

The Brexit referendum produced a 51.8 to 48.2 % in favour. A majority for Brexit but not a ringing endorsement by the people especially considering the wide variances geographically, as seen by the example of Scotland.

I know you've keen on Scottish independence, but I think the situation is difficult enough ATM without pushing for another referendum in the very near future.

First there must be a general election. Then a new government must be formed that has the political will and strength to push through the Article 50 process. Once the results of that begin to emerge, Scotland will have a better view of the suitability of staying in or leaving the Union, and can begin to make arrangements accordingly.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

Big trouble is in 2014 oil was $110 a barrel, not its under $50.

And? Scotland is economically viable on its own.

Scotland is a bit like Venezuela in this regards take away oil and there isnt much left. This isnt entirely rtrue, Scotland has a high tech industry, trouble is it doesnt have anything like enough industry to account for its underclass or to provide the admirable level of care that the Scottish government currently provides for its people.

Take away oil and UK funding to make up the differences Scots will have to take a large drop in standard of living to make up for independence, or get the funds elsewhere.

Now it is possible the EU might make Scotland an offer, to be independent and get into the EU on our ticket. but the only reason to do so would be as an 'attack' on the UK, particularly England. They would enjoy that in Paris. But its a wet dream.
First with a Bexit Uk using the pound will not be an option at all, ourtside of Panamaisation. The Euro is not popular with Scots and could be a deal breaker, it might be a requirement from Brussels.
Don't get me wrong Scotland would make it into the EU, but then you still have the Spanish veto to contend with.
The plus side for the SNP is that they dont have Wee Eck in charge.

Low oil prices are however a temporary thing, oil price will rise again, then comes the next point, Scottish waters are running out of extractable oil, but Salmond almost got away with hising that last time, and the SNP might again.

 Orlanth wrote:

1. Gibraltar doesn't want to be be part of Spain,

As of the last referrendum, who knows what the situation will be in 5 years? 10 years? 20?

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Ketara wrote:

This is true, and anyone who knows anything about the place or the mentality of the people will know it.

Things change, the (very faint) prospect of a united Ireland has been raised in the first time in over a century, who could have for seen that coming?

Still a far cry from happening



Protestants are still a majority so I doubt it'll happen.

Scotland has oil, tourism, agriculture, fisheries, luxury products like cashmere and whisky, financial services, education, technical industry including software and manufacturing, and the UK doesn't manage to provide for England's underclass.

I don't see any reason why Scotland couldn't go it alone successfully. I think they would be better off sticking with the union, except I think the union is going to be worse off outside the EU, so I can see why Scotland wants to be in the EU.

Joys of democracy eh ?


every vote they crawl out from god knows where and you worry about the future of the species.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Scotland has oil, tourism, agriculture, fisheries, luxury products like cashmere and whisky, financial services, education, technical industry including software and manufacturing, and the UK doesn't manage to provide for England's underclass.

I don't see any reason why Scotland couldn't go it alone successfully. I think they would be better off sticking with the union, except I think the union is going to be worse off outside the EU, so I can see why Scotland wants to be in the EU.

I'm already reforming my indy campaign group (had a few calls) so steps are in motion for another Scottish referendum.

I'm fully expecting to see the EU suddenly discover an old rule that allows Scotland to be fast tracked into the EU...assuming the EU survives the next few months

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

kb_lock wrote:
Without fear mongering, did we just watch the death of Britain?

Scotland wanted to stay in the eu, which is why they stayed in gb, that would absolutely be cause for a new referendum for them.

That is a given that the SNP will demand another referendum. Westminster can point to the last one and say this is a once a generation event.
You cant change government 'mid term', just because you dont like policy changes.
... ....

By Cameron resigning the UK is changing government 'mid term' because we don't like the policy. There will be a new prime minister when he goes and the new PM will appoint a new cabinet.

This is one reason why I think a general election is advisable before cracking on with Brexit. It would offer Scotland the chance to make plain their desire for independence and EU membership by electing 100% SNP MPs with a good margin.

Westminster FPTP elections are awful for determining the will of the people, that's the very point of referendums. At the Scottish elections we put a pro-indy majority in Holyrood using a system of proportional representation, that is who will speak for us now, and it will be through a referendum that we ourselves will speak.

Dismay seems to be quickly turning to resolve up here - even my postie greeted me this morning with a gak-eating grin and "indyref2 eh? haha"

 Bottle wrote:
Today is a terrible result for the UK.

Even with the best intentions the Leave result today has put in motion the dissolution of the UK as Scottish secession is now the likely outcome.

We're likely to see a second Scottish referendum before October when Article 50 will be submitted by the new PM. I say, good on the Scots - but this is a terrible day for the rest of us.

October is unlikely. It's more probable we'll see the Scottish Government open up lines direct to the EU to clarify everything first, then call the referendum closer to the end of the UK's negotiation period assuming they can get an assurance of rapid accession in the event of a Yes vote.

They are both awful.

FPTP produced a Tory majority government with only 36% of the votes.

The Scottish Referendum produced a 55 to 45 % against result, but is now being ignored by people like you, because now a different referendum has given a result that can be seen to conflict and produces a situation more to your taste.

The Brexit referendum produced a 51.8 to 48.2 % in favour. A majority for Brexit but not a ringing endorsement by the people especially considering the wide variances geographically, as seen by the example of Scotland.

I know you've keen on Scottish independence, but I think the situation is difficult enough ATM without pushing for another referendum in the very near future.

First there must be a general election. Then a new government must be formed that has the political will and strength to push through the Article 50 process. Once the results of that begin to emerge, Scotland will have a better view of the suitability of staying in or leaving the Union, and can begin to make arrangements accordingly.

To make matters worse Westminster, if it has the balls can run it like this.

Sotland decided in 2014 to have one referendum, as agrered by the UK in which only Scots voted.
Scotland chose to be part of the UK.
Any future referendum if therefore a UK matter as that is the poltical biody to which Scots, by their own consent belong., and if anyone is to be ballotted for 'indyref2' then a legal challenge can be made for all citizens of voting age to be permitted to be ballotted without discrimination. i.e Unless the English, and everyone else in the UK also get to vote on a second referendum then the referendum is discriminatory and unrepresentative and therefore invalid.
There are strong indications that a second refendum would effect people north and south of the border, and it would be undemocratic to exclude lawful citizens from being balloted for reasons of race or geography.

As a referendum is only SNP partly policy, not Uk government policy, there is no promise to uphold even if matters change. A high court challenge can be issued on behalf of disenfranchised UK voters, and the Scottish government might have to run the gauntlet of being informed that the vote is illegal unless wider balloted, which spares the Tories from having to act on the issue themselves and cause further division in Scotland.

Had Scotland not had a referendum this problem would not materialise. Trouble is for the SNP is that you had and the results are binding. A legal challenge is the best defence.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

I don't see any reason why Scotland couldn't go it alone successfully. I think they would be better off sticking with the union, except I think the union is going to be worse off outside the EU, so I can see why Scotland wants to be in the EU.

They would also out-Irish the Irish, being a (sort-of) English-speaking country within the EU to attract foreign companies.

Morgan Stanley has just announced that they have a task-force in place to shift 2,000 jobs from London to either Dublin or Frankfurt.

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

Interesting. Just a poll though.

.. and the financial exit begins.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3658024/US-bank-JPMorgan-says-UK-jobs-abroad.html

JPMorgan employs 16,000 people in Britain, while chairman and chief executive Jamie Dimon previously said that up to 4,000 jobs could move out of the UK.

Following an EU exit, London could shed 100,000 jobs, according to finance lobbyists TheCityUK ahead of the vote.

That is almost one in seven of the estimated 729,600 people employed by financial and related professional services in the traditional City district -- and the newer Canary Wharf area that houses Britain's biggest bank HSBC and rival Barclays.

On behalf of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Mother Russia, I would like to express sincere gratitude to the people of Great Britain. You have done the Motherland a great service. Thanks for crippling your own nation and weakening the liberast West for us.
Here, have a thumbs up:



Also: Cheaper Forgeworld! Yay!

 reds8n wrote:
Joys of democracy eh ?


every vote they crawl out from god knows where and you worry about the future of the species.

A couple of older women at work have admitted to voting leave as a way to protest against the government who were pushing for remain on the basis that leave could never possibly win, they actually support remain. I have no idea why anyone would do that. What's worse is that they didn't come up with this plan together but both decided to do it independently.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
On behalf of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Mother Russia, I would like to express sincere gratitude to the people of Great Britain. You have done the Motherland a great service.
Here, have a thumbs up:

I was wondering when the Russians would turn up

Besides, I thought Putin was too busy punishing the Russian football team for their bad performance at Euro 2016

The UK had a referendum on remaining inside the EU in 1975.

Why are those results not binding?

jouso wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

I don't see any reason why Scotland couldn't go it alone successfully. I think they would be better off sticking with the union, except I think the union is going to be worse off outside the EU, so I can see why Scotland wants to be in the EU.

They would also out-Irish the Irish, being a (sort-of) English-speaking country within the EU to attract foreign companies.

The only English speakers that no one else can understand.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The UK had a referendum on remaining inside the EU in 1975.

Why are those results not binding?

Because the situation is drastically different - my dad was saying that when he voted in the '75 referendum he voted to be part of the free market; now the 'free market' is waaaay beyond that - my dad said that one of the promises back then was that it would only ever be a free trade zone, nothing more.

The Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England have been in a United Kingdom for so long now that separation is really on a whole different level of difficult compared with the UK leaving the EU. If somehow Her Majesty would allow some of her property to transfer to the sizable fraction of the Scottish people who want to betray their monarch then those people will have no army, will have to float a new currency and so many other things too. It might just be easier for those people to migrate to the EU (or be deported there) if the EU is such a delightful overlord in their eyes. The EU is taking in Syrians by the million, why not Scots?

 reds8n wrote:
Joys of democracy eh ?


every vote they crawl out from god knows where and you worry about the future of the species.

He done messed up.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The UK had a referendum on remaining inside the EU in 1975.

Why are those results not binding?

It was the EEC in '75, and since then, we had Maastricht and Lisbon, which changed the terms of the original deal.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
On behalf of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Mother Russia, I would like to express sincere gratitude to the people of Great Britain. You have done the Motherland a great service.
Here, have a thumbs up:

I was wondering when the Russians would turn up

Besides, I thought Putin was too busy punishing the Russian football team for their bad performance at Euro 2016

As important as sports and punishing those who have failed their Motherland is to Putin, this is still marginally more important.
Putin has already reacted in support of the Brexit outcome
https://www.rt.com/news/348201-putin-brexit-weak-economies/

Hey, now that this is over, I'll show my support to our brothers across the ocean by helping their economy. Forge World, prepare yourself.

 Bi'ios wrote:
Hey, now that this is over, I'll show my support to our brothers across the ocean by helping their economy. Forge World, prepare yourself.

Better get a move on - the pound is starting to rise again

 SirDonlad wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The UK had a referendum on remaining inside the EU in 1975.

Why are those results not binding?

Because the situation is drastically different - my dad was saying that when he voted in the '75 referendum he voted to be part of the free market; now the 'free market' is waaaay beyond that - my dad said that one of the promises back then was that it would only ever be a free trade zone, nothing more.

The situation now is different to two years ago, or at least it will be once Article 50 is invoked.

 Goliath wrote:
Morgan Stanley has just announced that they have a task-force in place to shift 2,000 jobs from London to either Dublin or Frankfurt.

No they don't (yet at least).

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/morgan-stanley-brexit-eu-referendum-jobs-dublin-frankfurt-a7100911.html


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 reds8n wrote:
.. and the financial exit begins.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3658024/US-bank-JPMorgan-says-UK-jobs-abroad.html

JPMorgan employs 16,000 people in Britain, while chairman and chief executive Jamie Dimon previously said that up to 4,000 jobs could move out of the UK.

Following an EU exit, London could shed 100,000 jobs, according to finance lobbyists TheCityUK ahead of the vote.

That is almost one in seven of the estimated 729,600 people employed by financial and related professional services in the traditional City district -- and the newer Canary Wharf area that houses Britain's biggest bank HSBC and rival Barclays.

And with it some of the UK economy which, through incredible foresight, is now heavily built around financial markets who only set up in London due to lax regulation and access to the EU market.

On the plus side, if we can rebuild manufacturing in their absence then that would be good. On the down side I can't see that happening any time soon as the Tories don't have friends in unions and Labour seem useless at the moment, even if I like Corbyn as a person.