to think the Remainers aren't going to take this lying down and we won't leave

[SybilEngineer]

A million plus more people voted leave than remain but still over 16 million voted in. And many of the people this will affect - the under 18s - didn't get a say.

The majority of our elected representatives want us to remain as does our capital city.

The EU wants us to remain and once the leaders have stopped throwing their toys around they will realise they need to reform the EU and make changes that will keep UK and all the other eurosceptic people in.

Today has been a body blow for us remainers but, we're shot of Cameron, so we can re-group and start the fight to remain in the EU but with changes that much of Europe wants.

Well said Bill Brilliant post.

You don't seem to be able to deal with the fact that people can be perfectly well educated and informed and they still will not agree with you.

That's because sometimes people make completely baffling and illogical decisions, and the only way to understand those decisions is to think that perhaps the person making them didn't really get what they were doing.

See Cornwall now desperately seeking reassurances that despite voting Leave, they will still get the funding that up till now they've received from the EU - it's perfectly obvious that they won't, not from a Tory government. So how could they vote leave?
Or Wales? Saying 'What did the EU ever do for us?' Voting leave from their shiny new buildings with new contracts coming into the area who are now probably also going to be dropped in the shit as a consequence of their vote.

It's just inexplicable otherwise. They can't have understood.

Do you see?

Hear hear, Noble

No, I'm arguing for education. I've made it absolutely clear on multiple threads that I have problems with 'Remain' as well as with 'Leave' in terms of the way they handled evidence, and presented a false picture of the information.

I accept that perfectly well educated people will disagree with me. Plurality and difference are a fact of life and are to be valued. What depresses me is the number of people who are demonstrating incredible levels of ignorance on the subject they just voted for. I say: bring on the debate, but bring it on with evidence and data that can be supported, not 'real life experience' and 'common sense' that can't.

People don't want shiny new buildings at the whim of some EC quango though. They want less money going out of the country and it being used to fund a cohesive regional investment program from our own government.

There was a line from Power Monkeys on Friday night that said as much 'I know I'm always going to be ruled by elitist wankers, I'd just rather they were our elitist wankers.

Bollocks shove. You did not post saying that you believed that better education was needed across the board for people who voted either way and that the result of that may be to either vote leave or remain.

What you said was:

I'm convinced that 80% of leavers don't have the first fucking clue about anything.

We can't just ignore the result, though, because democracy makes no provision for intelligence. Votes are counted equally, regardless of whether someone is utterly stupid or stupendously bright.

I think attention would be better focused on considering how we can reach out to and inform those who are convinced that their 'common sense' dictated they should vote this way for the future.

That says quite clearly that you think most 'leavers' are thick and simply require re-educating until they agree with you.

Don't back track and try to diffuse what you said, it's incredibly clear.

Is that the data this is drawn from? Power Monkeys?

I don't mind people debating the numbers - I'm all for it - but I mind vague statements about 'the money we pay'. What figures are you using here? In particular, how are you modelling the cost of being inside the EEA against the 'gains' of leaving the EU?

char

so you are happy to be lied to in general elections. It doesn't matter that an election is every 5 year, our own parliament is voted in on a bed of lies.

goneto

This wasn't like a general election; the people making the 'pledges' have no obligation to fulfil them

neither do the governments that are elected on their "promises".

No, I don't think most leavers are thick. I think that most leavers are uneducated. And there is plenty of data to support that. blogs.ft.com/ftdata/2016/06/24/brexit-demographic-divide-eu-referendum-results/ (Graph 1)

Is that the data this is drawn from? Power Monkeys?

What data what is drawn from?

That's because sometimes people make completely baffling and illogical decisions

No, they make decisions which are baffling to you because you don't attempt to understand them. It wasn't a decision which can be based on 'logic' alone because some people win from the EU and some lose. What you believe is simple logic is actually you assessing the cost and benefits to yourself and deciding that it benefits you and extrapolating that therefore it should benefit everyone else too. That is not logic. Someone else in a different position can perfectly logically weigh up the costs and benefits to themselves and decide that the cost outweighs the benefits for them and vote leave. And that's fine, as long as they don't decide that their decision should be yours too and because it's not your decision isn't valid. Which is what you're doing.

See Cornwall now desperately seeking reassurances that despite voting Leave, they will still get the funding that up till now they've received from the EU

I think you're confused about the concept of 'Cornwall'. The people of Cornwall voted out. Now the Cornwall County Council is asking for reassurance about funding. They are not the same body of people. In fact, one might feel tempted to point out that it demonstrates a big disconnect between the benefits ordinary people feel from this funding in comparison to elected officials and bureaucrats.

For example someone working a zero hour seasonal contract for minimum wage might question exactly how they benefit from the EU funded Eden Project; which at £25 a pop is a general frolicking ground for middle class families. It received £26 million in EU funding yet only provides 400 jobs. So a cost of £65,000 per job on start up funding alone. Or perhaps those councillors are worried that they will lose their EU funded jollies to Brittany?

I think quite a few Cornish voters wouldn't really give a shit if that sort of funding went to the wall.

Really, rather than sneering at the Welsh and Cornish, you should be asking why, despite this funding, they feel the EU has made so little impact on the lives of ordinary people in these areas they were prepared to vote out. Surely if all these wonderful EU things were improving the lives of ordinary people so much they would have voted to stay in? The simple answer is simply that they are not benefitting them in any perceivable way.

It's just inexplicable otherwise. They can't have understood.

No, you are the one who doesn't understand and doesn't want to. It's far easier for you to just dismiss people as thick rather than actually listening to them or understanding that people have different experiences from your own which can lead them to vote in a perfectly reasoned and logical manner which isn't in the same way as you.

No, I'm not happy to be lied to but I can recognise the difference in the consequences of the vote.

Backtrack as much as you want shove, but which bit of

I'm convinced that 80% of leavers don't have the first fucking clue about anything.

suggests that you don't think all leavers are thick but are just concerned that they have poorer levels of education?

For example someone working a zero hour seasonal contract for minimum wage might question exactly how they benefit from the EU funded Eden Project

But the EU has fuck-all to do with zero hours contracts, that's the government's fault. That's what's not understood. The EU has given them something that has given them a shitty job, OK. But the government would have given them nothing, and is responsible for the existence of zero hours contracts. Isn't the blame going in the wrong direction?

But the EU has fuck-all to do with zero hours contracts, that's the government's fault.

That's only true if you are prepared to disconnect the proliferation of zero hours contracts and low wage jobs from the lowering of wages and work conditions which results from a high level of availability low skilled, transient, young labour who are prepared to work for crap terms conditions in return for low wages - which is normally EU migrants. Their willingness to take on these awful jobs has meant that young locals are often faced with a choice between these shitty dead end jobs or benefits.

Plus, one of the much vaunted claims of the Remain camp was that we had to stay in the EU because it protected workers rights. Someone doing a job like that would have been forgiven for having a dark chuckle and saying 'What rights?'.

Their willingness to take on these awful jobs has meant that young locals are often faced with a choice between these shitty dead end jobs or benefits.

But we know that a vote to leave won't actually stop immigration, but it will stop EU funding. Net outcome = worse. No?

Have a bit of empathy folks. As far as many of us are concerned, democracy just voted to jump our country off a cliff. Given that we believe that, we're not suddenly going to stop believing that because of a vote outcome. Democracy can make mistakes (as Germany can attest). Of course we're looking for a way to wriggle out.

What's interesting is it appears many of the politicians are too. Cameron's not quite resignation is very interesting and I think gave the markets pause for thought on Friday. Can he really stall the article 50 by several months by post dating his resignation? Mind you, Johnson doesn't sound in any hurry either. His Euro skeptic credentials are pretty dubious too. If the Tory party self destruct, I don't see an early election as out of the question.

We don't yet know that it won't stop EU immigration. The Remain campaign pointed out that if we went for the same option as Norway and Switzerland, it wouldn't. But to say, before negotiations have even started, that unrestricted free movement is inevitable is not true.

But given the fact that was made pretty clear during the campaign, isn't it telling that so many people were prepared to vote out just for the possibility it may be curtailed rather than the inevitable no possibility offered by remain?

From what I've heard from people in Yorkshire where I live, the general feeling is that during the bad times we all suffer. Then when the good times come around, the middle classes (and Londoners in particular) benefit. But the regional working classes don't because good times means an influx of cheap workers from elsewhere in the EU who drive down wages and conditions meaning that we carry on suffering while other people get the good times (often funded off the back of that cheap Labour - see Philip Green buying his third yacht from the money he saved by paying BHS workers wages so shit they had to be topped up by tax credits.

The perception, certainly where I live, is that wealthy Londoners want working class regionals to accept that they will never see good times again, but they should accept this and vote remain so that they can keep on having their good times.

Now, that is what a lot of people here see as the real turkeys voting for Christmas.

It's not as simply as 'labour supply up, wages down', though, is it? Because obviously the number of jobs in an economy is not fixed.

Not only that, but some migrants do different kinds of work, rather than substituting for UK workers, so wage effects are actually positive in this case because of additional growth, which stimulates better wages. In other cases, wages may initially fall because the migrant is a substitute for the British worker. It really depends on the context into which migration is happening. However, studies in this area suggest that the difference in wages is pretty slight. (From the URL below: 'Dustmann, Frattini and Preston (2013) find that an increase in the number of migrants corresponding to 1% of the UK-born working-age population resulted in an increase in average wages of 0.1 to 0.3%. Another study, for the period 2000-2007, found that a 1% increase in the share of migrants in the UK’s working-age population lowers the average wage by 0.3% (Reed and Latorre 2009). These studies, which relate to different time periods, thus reach opposing conclusions but they agree that the effects of immigration on averages wages are relatively small.')

The effects of migration also depend on the time frame over which you are measuring and the type of work. Lower skilled workers tend to suffer more than higher skilled ones in the short term, but in both cases and over the longer term, migration tends to stimulate economy activity, which stimulates better conditions.

Ironically, the effects on lower skilled workers are worse in an economic downturn - so if we see the likely outcome of Brexit: a long economic recession and continued freedom of movement, those who are worse off are likely to have worsened their position.

Good summary of some of the evidence here:
www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/labour-market-effects-immigration

ChardonnayKnickertonSmythe
No, I'm not happy to be lied to but I can recognise the difference in the consequences of the vote.

So if you voted tory would you be "accepting the consequences" for the poor, the disabled etc?

people vote all the time for what they believe is the best for them. whether it is local/general elections or referendums.

The truth is that which ever way you voted someone was always going to suffer.

Oh, and the idea that there are a fixed number of jobs in the economy is such a well-known error that it even has a name: the lump of labour fallacy.

Also, there is a global labour market even without free movement of people.

Businesses can relocate to places where labour is cheaper, and goods and services can be bought from outside the UK. To an extent you can prevent imports with tariffs, but Brexit was all about opening Britain up to countries like China and India.