If leaving the EU is a complete and utter disaster, who will you blame?

[fakenamefornow]

Ten years down the line, the economy is struggling because of it, troubles in NI are inflamed again, I'm scared to even think what might go wrong in Gibraltar or a split with Scotland. Anyway, if it is a huge mistake, who will be at fault?

summerisdone
Yes keep telling yourself that narrative about how 'brave' we were as a nation to try something new if it makes you feel better.
Bravery shouldn't be confused with stupidity.

The single currency collapsing would be really bad for us, whether we are in the EU or not. The collapse of the EU would also be bad for us, even after we have left. They are our nearest neighbours and biggest trading partner, chaos and collapse anywhere in the world can have disastrous knock on effects. We will always be affected by the decisions our neighbours make, and by how successful they are.
All that's changed is that we are giving up the influence we had over the direction of the EU.

And the fact that the Trump administration think Brexit is great doesn't fill me with confidence.

This is really bad taste, sorry, but here are some "brave" people who tried something new: www.darwinawards.com/

Ten years down the line

If the economy is struggling it will probably be the fault of the government.

If troubles in NI are inflamed it will the fault of terrorists.

If things go wrong in Gibraltar it will be the fault of the Spanish.

If their is a split with Scotland it will be the fault of the SNP.

On all these issues the EU is either part of the problem or papering over the cracks. Which ever it is the answer is not to stay on a sinking ship because you are afraid the lifeboat wont save you. Lets pull together and row towards something better.

If we had stayed in the EU and it was a complete and utter disaster, who would you have blamed?

Ten years down the line, the economy was struggling because of the Euro, troubles in NI flared up again, I'm scared to even think what might go wrong in Greece or a split with Scotland. Anyway, if it was a huge mistake, who would have been at fault?

I don't recognise that analogy as being an accurate representation of the problem.
It's more like telling people to jump into the sea without a lifejacket because the ship is having engine trouble, the passengers are arguing and the buffets rubbish.

What are we rowing towards Jamie? What's your vision for the glorious future? Are you able to elaborate without a load of meaningless phrases like "take back control"?

What's your vision for the glorious future?

Don't get your question, my vision is for a glorious future
Maybe I have faith in the people of the UK that we will have a prosperous country no matter what because that is what we have always done.

A "glorious future" means very different things to different people.
So, free trade with Europe or not?
If not, what shall do about the rising costs of imports, and what shall we replace our lost trade with?
Employment rights and environmental regulations - are they worth keeping, or are they "red tape"?
How far should controls on migration go?
Who decides the quotas (or whose lobbying do we listen to) - Big industry, small companies, farmers, academia, economists?
Would you accept greater immigration from India in exchange for more access to their markets?
Should we lower our standards to compete with other countries?
Move back towards an economy based on manufacturing, or opt for an economy based on services, or both?
Tax haven, or not?

"Maybe I have faith in the people of the UK that we will have a prosperous country no matter what because that is what we have always done" - Er, so by that logic we have always been prosperous no matter what, so we could be prosperous within the EU, so what was the point in leaving?

So..
free trade with Europe or not? - works either way.
what shall do about the rising costs of imports - Import from the 168 countries not in the EU, import less, produce more.
what shall we replace our lost trade with - IF their is any lost trade then replace it trade from the 168 countries not in the EU
Britain's economy beats forecasts with 0.6% growth in the last quarter
Employment rights and environmental regulations - Employment rights tweaked, possibly strengthened, climate regulation around the same.
How far should controls on migration go? Give visas to people who have skills that are needed.
Who decides the quotas - Government proposes, voters decide who governs.
Would you accept greater immigration from India in exchange for more access to their markets - If they have skills we need.
Should we lower our standards to compete with other countries - Broad question, so broadly no, but our standards will be decided by our government not dictated by the EU.
Move back towards an economy based on manufacturing, or opt for an economy based on services - Whatever is needed to be successful.
Tax haven, or not? - That's a a question of how you define a tax haven. We should set taxes according to what makes our country successful and raises the most tax.

Its all pretty straight forward.

"We have always been prosperous"- are you nuts?? Read up on social history in the uk over the 20th century (The call the midwife books are a really great introduction). Abject poverty was a feature of many people's lives for most of the 20th century and living conditions were only made better by the introduction of the welfare state and social housing in the 1950s. Which the tories now have carte Blanche to destroy thanks to Brexit.

When we were prosperous, the benefits of this only extended to a small portion of society. We don't have a glorious and we definitely don't have a glorious future.

so by that logic we have always been prosperous no matter what, so we could be prosperous within the EU, so what was the point in leaving?

a) The point in leaving is because most voters want to leave.

b) We were increasingly losing our ability to determine our own future which meant our prosperity was being taken out of our hands.

*glorious past

Chasing a toddler

"We have always been prosperous"- are you nuts??

I didn't say we were always prosperous although I accept it could have been interpreted as such. I meant we (the UK) have always been able to make our country more prosperous. Short term pain for long term gain.

See, I doubt that any "pain" or the "gain" will be evenly distributed.

And the ability to make our country prosperous is dependant upon how well we scrutinise and challenge politicians, the willingness of politicians to work with the democratic process (May should be aware of this), and on politicians listening to experts.
Blind optimism, flag waving and shouting down any concerns as "negative" or "unpatriotic" whilst our government steams ahead with an autocratic, hard line approach is not the way to prosperity.

Are you just a troll? Why am I a troll just because I dont agree with your view that leaving the EU is a disaster?

have you considered geography? The further the transport distance, the greater the cost - We just got a train load of goods from China, a month faster than it took to send it by boat, therefore a heck of a lot cheaper.

Why should we support climate regs in that case? Because its the right thing to do irrespective of Trumps views*

Immigration from India - Not May's current policy Or indeed the policy of most of the voters, as evidenced by the Brexit vote.

will turning the clock back, even if it were possible, recreate the Empire? Who is suggesting we turn the clock back or recreate the Empire, that is just histrionics.

"If there is a split with Scotland it will be the fault of the SNP."

If Scotland has left the UK thereafter to be known as FUKD, it will be because the Scottish people wanted to do and not the SNP's "fault" Believe it or not, there are people who don't support the SNP who support independence. The Green Party has MSPs who agree with it (and as such there is a majority of MSPs who support it) and there are Labour Party groups - and even a few Conservatives - who are in favour.

A truly federal state might have stopped the momentum but the Supreme Court ruling proved that the "most powerful devolved administration in the world" is a lie anything but, and the Sewel Convention is just that, a convention at the convenience and gift of Westminster, with no requirement to consult and which can be ignored at any time.

Anyone who can describe the decisions and consequences (many of which will be impossible to predict) or Britain leaving the EU as "straightforward" does not understand the issues.
I have more respect for leavers who admit it is incredibly complicated.
The Kruger Dunning effect: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

I doubt that any "pain" or the "gain" will be evenly distributed I agree with that but isn't that the case already and wasn't it always so? The EU certainly doesn't share its gains or pains, just compare the gain Germany gets against the pain Greece is suffering.

The voters for voting for something which had nothing concrete behind it other than a 'we want to be free of the EU shackles'.

Jamie "Immigration from India - Not May's current policy Or indeed the policy of most of the voters, as evidenced by the Brexit vote."

Based on how sure certain reports are on what people voted for any why, I think there was electoral fraud in relation to the ballot paper I was given. There was only a single question about remaining or leaving the EU. Where do I complain? Certainly in light of people setting themselves up as clairvoyants about how every single person voted to incorporate things not on the ballot. If they are saying people voted in certain ways because in their opinion.... . They could also be attributing motives to my vote that are pure conjecture. I was not asked or did not give any reason for my vote. Or what scenario in relation to markets, unions, Norway or Nigeria. India wasn't on my paper either. I heard talking heads saying how the Commonwealth was a natural market for UK to be leader of. As an alternative to being a mere equal in the EU.

Of course, Commonwealth countries are not quite as easily swayed to adopt certain positions sympathetic to the UK's point of view without the army of the East India Company to persuade them of the UK's natural affinity with them or that what is good for the UK is automatically good for them.

That's so weird Cailleach1, my ballot paper was like that too! Just the one question. Was I supposed to turn it over to answer the questions on the back? I made that mistake in an exam once.

Immigration from India - Not May's current policy Or indeed the policy of most of the voters, as evidenced by the Brexit vote.

So they don't want these trade deals with Commonwealth countries after all?