Brexit - positives Remainers acknowledge, negatives Leavers acknowledge

The uplift in wages is an interesting one as I've yet to witness it in within my circle of friends/families.

Are these "real" uplifts (i.e outstripping inflation and actually leading to more more in your pocket?)

Which industries and "grades" have benefited? I get the impression it's those at the bottom of the ladder who should have real increase in wages years ago.

Is this a case of "we pay people more, but still not enough?"
 
I think the effect on the work force has been double edged… while there’s benefit in more vacancies and a supposed uplift in wages, the negative is the shortfall in skilled labour and people willing to do lower paid work…
There is no benefit from more vaccines because the more vaccine story is a lie
 
The positives were always more intangible though - the notion of freedom, taking back control etc. The referendum was fought on an ideological basis by the leavers, whereas it was fought on a tangible practical basis by the remainers - trade, the economy etc.

But it was also fought on the basis of a promise that if we left things would improve and change would come. So far the only changes have been negative
 
The positives were always more intangible though - the notion of freedom, taking back control etc. The referendum was fought on an ideological basis by the leavers, whereas it was fought on a tangible practical basis by the remainers - trade, the economy etc.

But it was also fought on the basis of a promise that if we left things would improve and change would come. So far the only changes have been negative
The same notion and ideology continues to hark back to a make believe World War 2 scenario as well. See Duncan-Smith recently mentioning "blitz spirit". When will this country start recognising that WW2 is long gone and in fact, the country didn't single-handily defeat the Nazis. The country played a part, but if it wasn't for American Lend Lease and Russian blood the Nazis would not have been defeated.
 
Not really a positive of brexit, but more a negative of remaining that we've avoided, is that we really weren't very good at being an EU member and would have become even worse.

Our government representatives weren't usually very good at influencing the rest of the EU. The times when they were able to influence were usually to push the EU to the right. We didn't really get the way other countries played the game with the EU (remember the tories letting our steel industry go kaput quoting EU rules while Germany and other just did what they liked during that crisis and then went back to usual rules afterwards...) and perhaps worst of all we'd gotten in to a habbit of electing UKIP MEPs that never showed up to the Euro Parliament. If remain had narrowly won the referendum, or if we'd ended up remaining via a decision in Parliament or a confirmation vote, that habbit would probably have gotten even worse.

None of that's to say we'll be any better at not being a member of course.
 
Last edited:
The EU wants to be a supranational state not just an organisation. I didn't think it was beneficial to move that far.
I'm glad we are out for that reason but would have preferred an approach like Norway.

Yes there are problems with the transition but it will be a number of years before we know the full effects of leaving the EU.
 
The EU wants to be a supranational state not just an organisation. I didn't think it was beneficial to move that far.
I'm glad we are out for that reason but would have preferred an approach like Norway.

Yes there are problems with the transition but it will be a number of years before we know the full effects of leaving the EU.
There will be no downsides to Brexit, only a considerable upside.
 
The EU wants to be a supranational state not just an organisation. I didn't think it was beneficial to move that far.
I'm glad we are out for that reason but would have preferred an approach like Norway.

Yes there are problems with the transition but it will be a number of years before we know the full effects of leaving the EU.
You are ignoring the veto that the UK used to have.
 
Not really a positive of brexit, but more a negative of remaining that we've avoided, is that we really weren't very good at being an EU member and would have become even worse.

Our government representatives weren't usually very good at influencing the rest of the EU. The times when they were able to influence were usually to push the EU to the right. We didn't really get the way other countries played the game with the EU (remember the tories letting our steel industry go kaput quoting EU rules while Germany and other just did what they liked during that crisis and then went back to usual rules afterwards...) and perhaps worst of all we'd gotten in to a habbit of electing UKIP MEPs that never showed up to the Euro Parliament. If remain had narrowly won the referendum, or if we'd ended up remaining via a decision in Parliament or a confirmation vote, that habbit would probably have gotten even worse.

None of that's to say we'll be any better at not being a member of course.

All that happens is the Tories will still let industries like steel go to the wall. It's ideological for them, not because they didn't know how to 'play the system' so to speak.

I do know what you mean though.
 
You are ignoring the veto that the UK used to have.

That could be one of the biggest losses thinking about it. If a European Army ever came to fruition we have no say - before we could happily sit and veto it. That's just one example but now we have no say how our closest neighbours operate and that in itself could be dangerous for defence / trade etc.

It's a massive own goal.
 
The EU wants to be a supranational state not just an organisation.
The "EU" is not a person, is not its President or any individual. The EU does not "want" anything. Some people may see a future as a "Supranational State" others do not. As pointed out our veto could have prevented that ever happening.

On a related note, I have never heard an argument against becoming such a state that doesn't invoke xenophobia (e.g. the Germans telling us how to make sausages or other nonsense)
 
Might be playing devil's advocate here, but what are the downsides of an EU Supranational state (pre-Brexit of course)?

Presumably it's the intangibles again - sovereignty, freedom, Great British Imperialism etc...
 
The "EU" is not a person, is not its President or any individual. The EU does not "want" anything. Some people may see a future as a "Supranational State" others do not. As pointed out our veto could have prevented that ever happening.

On a related note, I have never heard an argument against becoming such a state that doesn't invoke xenophobia (e.g. the Germans telling us how to make sausages or other nonsense)
The early proponents of the EU had the aim of creating a supranational state and whilst the EU is not a body as you state the direction of travel is very much in that direction by proponents of the idea.

The argument against it is not xenophobic but political and your sausage example is a poor one.
 
I have no idea what you mean by that? Are you trying to claim we could not have vetoed it, even if that was actually something that was wanted?
The veto is not as clear cut as an absolute veto. Yes some important issues require all countries to agree.

However on other issues a majority is enough. If fewer than 4 countries vote against or abstain then the law passes. Population matters as member states representing 65% of all the people in the EU have to vote for the law for it to pass. However if 3 countries with 36% of the population vote against the law it will still pass unless a 4th country joins them.

When votes have been taken the UK has been on the losing side more than any other country
 
Back
Top