How will Brexit affect the price of the Pyra?


It's on the official petitions website, and has almost 4 million signatures from people who legitimately signed the text as it currently stands.

The petition itself has (allegedly) dubious origins and has been found to have thousands of fake signatures and signatures of those living outside of the UK - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-36640459

Any genuine signatures are now pretty much invalid, as the petition is now worthless.
 
The petition was started pre-Brexit by a Leave supporter who was worried that the vote would be 52/48% remain majority, so could be used to try and claw back victory in case his side lost. He has since distanced himself from the petition saying that the remain camp have subverted it for dishonest means... Which is quite funny really.

Anyway, yes the PM has said no to a second referendum (though the history of europe is literally littered with them when the popular vote didn't go as intended) and I'd not rule it out when the next PM finds himself having to pull the plug via Article 50.

As the primary prongs of the Leave campaign's propaganda have all been debunked thoroughly (£349 Million/Week for the NHS, but mostly due to promised immigration controls) whoever is in power when the time comes will almost certainly try anything they can to wriggle out of it. But with the Euro-chaps all baying for blood and demanding Article 50 immediately they likely won't get a choice.
 
A referendum is pretty much a failure of government, in that they're unable to make a decision that they know to be the right one so they open it up to the population to gauge what they should do. It's not (and never has been) legally binding, but of course with feelings running so high if they don't abide by the "the will of the people" (which is a joke, as the vast majority on both sides had no idea what they were voting for) then they're risking a very real threat of rioting and it won't be pretty; a not-insignificant proportion of the population voted to leave on racist grounds[1] and will likely initiate violence against perceived foreigners if they don't get what they feel they were promised.

And of course, what with the alarming amount of negative consequences of even considering an exit from Europe scaring pretty much everyone a second referendum would likely vote to remain anyway, which would further stir up that not-insignificant proportion of the population.

And when we leave, immigration won't be affected - the need to trade with the EU will demand the free movement of europeans and the real immigration that people are so concerned about is from non-EU counties anyway and France will almost certainly stop their efforts to halt them at the English Channel... Oh my.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Interesting times are ahead.



[1] No, I'm not saying that all leave voters are racist, just that the real racists (of which there are lots; this is England) now think that 52% of the population see things their way.
 
A not insignificant proportion of the population are already pretty close to committing racist violence if online reports and videos are to be believed. I thought I heard on the radio today that figures of reported hate crimes were up on the same period last week, but I can't find anything now I'm searching online. Worrying times for sure anyway.
 
If you let a side have a vote, then pretend they are racists, I'm equally worried about the racist and the "anti"-racists.

Insofar as real racists are concerned, they are very basic at large. Predictably they will cause havoc if things turn worse.
Even if you have the right idea, accepting media guidance and resorting to not seeking out people with whom you disagree is dangerous.

So when one set of dumb people write of the other, it doesn't matter who is dumber anymore, its just an issue for everyone else, and assigning blame becomes an exercise for whoever reigns victorious at the end of it.

Norway is in the EU economic zone, but not in the EU. And policy was set in stone long before we joined the economic zone.
We could afford not to join, and we don't allow immigration. We are failing with the immigration we have, we aren't small enough to turn an Iceland and just refuse to own the problems foreign interest would cause, and we aren't big enough to have any influence, but at-least we aren't in a position where we cant afford to leave the EU.

We could ask to join because we have oil and fish, but that would be naïve, also, those are the kind of benefits you can sell on a market, that is what a market is.

Modern Britain, after losing the colonies, was shaped by Thatcher, that is something that didn't work. I think even the people who thought it might, are now on the pendulum back to whatever isn't knowingly non-functional, even if it means ripping away some supporting structure.

I think that is the smart people, plus the agreed consensus, and that one-issue policy wont sway the people that have been around a while.

Yes Thatcher was against the EU, but then Britain found itself in the same policy, only now replacing sovereignty for promise. The country isn't run into the ground, but the premise of leaving, means maybe that. After that there is no special or foreign interest in anything, because its worse than what everyone else "has".

Scotland thought it could be the thing that leached off EU, on the back of England. Turns out their sovereignty would cost them that. Now that the part that is decidedly not Scotland, is out of the EU, Scotland wont be able to join on the same terms. And they wont even get to have a say about it.

So Scotland could leave the UK, but its not the same EU-deal at the end of it. So Scotland will threaten to leave the UK to get more of a say in it, kinda like England did prior to leaving the EU.

So the stability may come when the EU realizes France isn't big on being at the losing end of a deal. Its all fun and games when its going well, but then, they are all alone with the problems they have.

So the EU could accept member countries on more equal terms, but that will never happen, because that isn't what the EU is.

The EU is running into the problems they created, and have not surprisingly, no real plan to fix it. Border control is thought to be for all people in it, but that doesn't work when you start letting in people without passports. Work-immigration isn't what the states that get it want, and there are no basic labour jobs left for people who aren't educated. The common currency has turned a blind eye to corruption, because it pays. Now the national state is back, because someone has to pay. Then austerity doesn't exactly work. Its the polar opposite to corruption, with the same non-real economy to show for it.

You can sell infrastructure to foreign interest to "fix things", a lot of security actually will seemingly fix the economy, but if you look at how it all operates, and who it matters to, its a lot harder to build these securities.

Securities like unions can be problematic, social security equally so, but matters efficiency see to it that they are self-collapsing.

Its a game of filling up your glass, then dripping it into a bowl of common water among states, whoever has enough water to come up with the idea, has water left at the end of it, which is the crucial difference. You can use that to win big, but you can never not go broke with it.

Some countries have just hacked this process, making the ties backwards stronger than what is a symbiotic relationship, which only happens when you are either powerful in a military sense, or are too big to fail.

The people actually in the EU are very few, and they are huge, everyone else slightly apprehensive about increasing the speed at which the fan operates, knowing the shit will hit it, sooner or later.

Having your own agriculture is sometimes the only idea that matters.

The EU collaboration is, and has been at that stage even collectively, for a long time, with respect to describing the fan, its operation can not be denied. Not everyone can just pension-out in Brussels and live on arrogance.

When was the last time something was corrupt and it didn't benefit someone? It is not down to incompetence, and it sure isn't manageable greed.
Asking for justice of something intent to bring down the national state, is quite feign.
 
A not insignificant proportion of the population are already pretty close to committing racist violence if online reports and videos are to be believed. I thought I heard on the radio today that figures of reported hate crimes were up on the same period last week, but I can't find anything now I'm searching online. Worrying times for sure anyway.

Well, there are a couple of FB groups dedicated to reporting racist attacks and confrontations and their pages are swelling at an alarming rate. However, getting your news via social media is a recipe for disaster as only news that is deemed relevant to your interests (determined algorithmically) is served up - you have to cast your net wide these days. That said, it's worrying that the racists think that we're going to be kicking people out; that was never the case at all.

So yes, I can certainly see riots in the near future.
 
All I'm seeing is the usual pseudo democracy everywhere.
If you have a vote for whatever, you have to handle the results and not try to wriggle out of them by saying the winners are assholes/racists/devils/whatever, that's basic democracy. It doesn't matter whether you're "right" and the majority of people isn't able to make good decisions, if this is the case, your national education has failed but you can't just put democratic principles aside.

How did Andreas Thiel (Swiss satirist) put it so nicely in another context:
"Normally the population has to make do with the decisions of the government, now it's the other way round for once."
 
This whole thing is a clusterfuck and should never gone to a referendum. Cameron only offered the referendum to win over UKIP voters. I am actually surprised he followed through with it, seeing as he's lied about so many other things!
All the leave campaigners, aside from probably Farage, never wanted to really leave. They wanted two things:

  1. Imbalance power within the Tories to get Cameron to resign so that they could fill his shoes. They wanted the vote to be closely on the remain side to push the point that Cameron only got a very slim majority.
    Now they have got the leave result, they are terrified of stepping up to that responsibility.
  2. They wanted the result to be close enough to pressure the EU. The waiting game that they've been playing is also trying to prevent pushing the button on article 50, but they want the EU to give them a deal and I guess, preferably without freedom of movement. Unfortunately with a leave (slim) majority they've played all the cards and the only deal is now going to make us worse off as a country.
Screw this anyway. I don't want to be British any more. I've pretty much decided I give up and I'm going to fuck off to Chile as soon as I can afford to do so, which may be way down the line with the rate the pound is falling.
 
Hi all,

I have found these two interesting articles about Brexit on Slashdot.

Looking at the keywords people were hitting up on Google after the news first broke, it was clear that a considerable portion of the population was clueless about the whole situation.

As the world makes peace with the news that the United Kingdom has voted to leave the European Union, people in the UK are increasingly trying to figure out what this means.

The questions also speak volume about the awareness of the issue among them.

Opinions ?

Cheers, Magic Sam
 
All the leave campaigners, aside from probably Farage, never wanted to really leave
How many did you speak to and ask why?

Opinions ?
There are a lot of dumb f**ks in this country, and that's certainly not limited to those voting Leave. To be fair, none of the media or campaigns really actually told you what you were voting for. People (even outside the country) assume it was "Do we like our European neighbours and can we still go there on holiday", rather than about the political European Union, who they are, what they do and what they stand for. Whilst they are closely linked, they are not the same.

Meanwhile, apparently Denmark and co will potentially soon lose their currencies to the Euro; and there's all the talk leaked by the Polish about the EU Superstate consuming all the EU countries.

I saw a modified version of the Winnie the Pooh meme about Leave votes legitimising the racist abuse that some Britons are exhibiting. That irked me, because along those lines, you should also strike any muslim for legitimising the Islamic State, any Christian for the Crusades, etc. ad nauseam.

The most depressing thing about this whole thing is that people have become very bitter and abusive regardless of what "side" they were on, and it's turned nasty, when really we should be working together to pull through.

Ugh, I didn't want to say anything else on the EU Ref. :-(
 
OK I don't really mean ALL. I mean Gove and Boris.
And it's how they've been acting since the referendum, their absence, the lack of a plan, etc.
That could be they didn't want to really leave, could also be they didn't expect Leave would win, or could be a simple as they're clueless baffoons; or stranger, but not impossible, they might know something we don't and this "stall" is part of whatever is going on behind the curtains.
There are reports that Corbyn might have voted leave despite campaigning for remain, which might explain why he was so half-arsed.

I guess the real question everyone is asking themselves about now is if we can take Britain.
What do you mean by "take Britain"? As in, you're thinking of invading?
 
Yeah, let's make it EU's colony. I mean, the Brits don't know, what they want, right? Let's help.
You're confused, a lot of us know what we want, it's just we don't all want the same thing. Variety is the spice of life after all...
 
Back
Top