Implications of not invoking Article 50

[CuppaTeaAndAJammieDodger]

So there is plenty of talk about whether or not Article 50 will actually be triggered.

Let's say that it's not, what do you think the implications will be? Will the whole sorry mess just get swept under the carpet? Will we be forevermore looked upon as the laughing stock of the EU? Will it's initiate a conversation and possibly action to shake up British politics for the better or worse?

Would like to hear anyone's thoughts.

What scuppered that line of thought was the EU refusal to have any talks - even informal ones - with the UK until Article 50 is invoked.

^This!

I spent the first weekend feeling like my stomach was missing. Hoping that further negotiations would happen leading to a second vote. But it did not happen, because the EU refused.

Why did the EU refuse? It almost certainly would have done the trick. Were they just vindictive? Is Junker blocking it? Is he even that powerful? I've been reflecting on this. I think perhaps the EU and particularly the Eurozone is perhaps better off without us. They need more integration because the currency union isn't working without it. Without the UK in the mix being awkward and blocking further integration, perhaps they can do what they need to do.

Meanwhile, we are sending troops to Eastern Europe to form part of a front line against Russia. I haven't seen or heard any clear reporting about just how big our commitment is. I do worry that a "nasty divorce" with the EU could lead to resentment that tears NATO apart.

In the words of Douglas from Cabin Pressure, "I am chastened and ashamed" Peregrina.

What's done is done. We need fantastic negotiations dealing with this right now to protect millions of people. But instead both sides have decided to self imploaded which is absolutly madness! I think this shows the true priority of our governments.

I agree DutchCourage, we need to accept this and focus our energies on coping with it as best we can. I am not sure that our government as imploded. I hope not. It looks messy, but at least the Conservatives are working through a process and please, please let Theresa May be chosen over Leadsom who frankly looks way to green for this challege. Labour looks even more disordered at the moment, but I hope things are going on behind the scenes. We really do need everyone bringing their "A game."

Why did the EU refuse?

Well they called our gov's bluff I guess as if they actually had a plan to put to EU to begin with but obviously nothing.

I thought this was well known up front that no discussions till its triggered would happen.

Thing is when you have people like Farage standing up talking crap to people you might want to get some wiggle room with, its never going to happen.

We are not allowed to point out that they are 'protesting' by replacing one set of Tories with an arguably worse set of Tories because that is tantamount to calling them 'stupid' apparently.

That is what you are doing. It has been comnented tomd upon time about the intelligence and education of people who voted leave.

No. This is NOT what I'm doing. I have not commented anywhere about the intelligence or education of leave voters. Please do not put words into my mouth. Why on earth, if we think the people who are claiming this was a protest might be in a worse state later, are we not allowed to say so? Would you prefer us to wait for the (possibly) inevitable and say 'Well, I could have told you it might get worse'? I am heartily sick of accusations like yours being used to stifle discussion or debate.
Not all leavers voted as 'protest' either. On fact many didn't.
I'm quite well aware of that, hence my comment about the Home Counties, etc.

I do think that there is a significant element in the EU who see the UK as a barrier and obstructive and will be very glad if/when we leave, hence the immediate jump to "we must leave now"

I appreciate that the IRL second referendum was on a second wording but how about the French referendum which was held twice?

So you reckon they are ready to let their second largest country go (maybe we are third largest after this last week's tourmoil?) because the representatives and bureaucrats there were personally offended?

I am sure there are people who are personally offended and at their wits end. I have just always thought that when push came to shove people would put that aside for their countries' and project's greater interests.

That's why I am wondering if they haven't made the calculation that it is actually in their best interests for us to go.

"..the French referendum which was held twice.."??

There was one referendum in 2005 on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. France voted no, as did the Netherlands.

As a consequence, after much toing and froing, the idea of a Constitution was eventually abandoned. The Lisbon Treaty (the subject of the two Irish referendums) is what replaced it, to all intents and purposes.

PigletWasPoohsFriend with twofingerstoGideon - i thought they were posting from a genuine concern for people who have voted to leave who will most likely be worse off rather than a 'we know best' point of view.

That concern is being written off as sour elitism

Thanks, BreakingDad, that's exactly it. I don't want to see more division in this country and I don't like the way the referendum is being used as an excuse to pitch one 'side' against the other. I believe people should be allowed to express an opinion on this very important issue without being told they're elitist, out of touch, patronising, or whatever.

I don't want to see more division in this country and I don't like the way the referendum is being used as an excuse to pitch one 'side' against the other. I believe people should be allowed to express an opinion on this very important issue without being told they're elitist, out of touch, patronising, or whatever.

That works both ways. If you want Leavers to stop with the stereotyping then Remainers have to stop it too.

Of course you're "allowed to point out that they have probably done themselves no favours in terms of their local economies". Equally, those concerned are allowed to disagree with you, challenge your stereotyping of them as stupid and uninformed, and be regarded as experts on their own lives and what they see and experience for themselves. And in particular they can remind you that not everyone puts the economy at the top of their list, despite the insistence of some remainers that this can't possibly be the case.

I believe people should be allowed to express an opinion on this very important issue without being told they're elitist, out of touch, patronising, or whatever.

I believe people should be allowed to express the opinion that some people and their arguments are elitist, out of touch and patronising.

i thought they were posting from a genuine concern for people who have voted to leave who will most likely be worse off rather than a 'we know best' point of view.

People can decide for themselves if they feel they're better or worse off. And many leave voters would rather be poor and free than wealthy and in the EU. Those on the leave side may have a genuine concern for the remainers who don't see the goals of the EU as problematic.

Jeez. It's like an endless round of "I'm Spartacus" in reverse.

I believe people should be allowed to express the opinion that some people and their arguments are elitist, out of touch and patronising.

II find that argument hard to apply to concerns of loss of EU funding where Brexit refuses to ring fence that money or even accept that those areas are in need of help, and what we need is businesses with less employee protection.

Brave new world, innit.

Where experts must not be trusted and ill-informed arguments must not be challenged.

Most of the leave voters I know voted out because of the Muslims or the Poles, but Ok, I mustn't question this because I will come across as elitist, out of touch and patronising.

People can decide for themselves if they feel they're better or worse off.
I would have thought it was more than a matter of perception. But what would I know?

But people may feel "better off" for intangible reasons that cannot be objectively measured. That's why you have to trust the individual to decide if they are better off or not. When you decide if someone else is better off you cannot help but bring your opinions, values, and biases into the calculation which the object of your judgement may not share.

Good for them then.

It is very heartening to hear that people will feel better off out of the eu even though they may well lose their jobs and homes. I certainly hadn't looked at it like that before.

Yes, we have no need to worry about anyone ever again. Forget empathy or sympathy. Who cares about wealth inequality etc when it's all just a matter of perception?

Be as snide as you like. If you say to someone: you will be economically worse off, and they reply with some variant of "money isn't everything." I think it is arrogant to assume they are a fool who doesn't know what's best for them.

I actually thought some people had been duped by the lies and the unattainable promises of the leave campaign.
So I'm glad the people of Sunderland, Derby, Coventy, Solihull voted out because they decided 'money isn't everything'. That's a positive approach given they will most likely lose their key industries. It kind of absolves everyone else of any responsibility towards them too.

So I'm glad the people of Sunderland, Derby, Coventy, Solihull voted out because they decided 'money isn't everything'. That's a positive approach given they will most likely lose their key industries.

So you speak for everyone from those places? At least one else of those places doesn't have a 'key industry' any more and hasn't for a very long time.