EU Brexit thread

[1eyedjack]

Not quite interesting storm in a teacup developing is an online petition asking for a re-run of the referendum, that has attracted 3.5m votes (maybe more by now). Anything over 100K votes triggers a parliamentary debate on it. Not that it will get anywhere. The only individuals voting in the petition would be Bremainers. And we already know that there are about 15m of them, so no surprises there.

 

To be fair, the petition is not quite for a straight re-run. It was initially set up before the referendum took place, and called for a re-run in the event that either victory was less than 60% based on a turnout of less than 75%, which this result was.

 

What I think would be interesting would be a second referendum asking the same question but open only to those originally registered to vote in the first run, but did not vote first time around, the results then to be added cumulatively to the first set.

[shyams]

But finally, your compartmentalising logic also doesn't work for me on a purely emotional level. When I meet a Polish immigrant in the bus, or a Romanian immigrant comes to do a job in our house, or another immigrant takes care of my son in his day care, then I feel I have something in common with them - having immigrated to the same country, maybe having some of the same mixed feelings about it, etc. So when the fromageGBs of the world want those Eastern European immigrants out, then I feel targeted, too. Their anger might not be directed at me, and the Boris Johnson's of Westminster would probably never implemented immigration rules that would life directly difficult for me. But when they target them, I identify; and when Nicola Sturgeon or Sadiq Khan make a point of being welcoming to them and all other immigrants, it touches me on a personal level.

I really don't have anything constructive to add because anything I say will either be apologist (I did not want Brexit) or sound extremist (how do I justify throwing out immigrants, if that is what Brexit means?).

 

The compartmentalisation I used was a rationalisation for "things will not be all bad despite Brexit". And, given a choice between hope and fear, I choose hope. I know that sounds like a car bumper sticker, but I have no better way to describe it.

 

I don't know how the future will pan out, but I also have a strong belief in the ability of the UK establishment to do great work in a crisis --- e.g. the UK response to the post-Lehman financial crisis was a well-constructed solution which became a template for actions by many other governments.

[Cyberyeti]

Sigh. Are you intentionally missing the point? No one claimed that this was a conspiracy. The point is that no one wants their basic freedom (as in, not being put in jail in preparation for a deportation without any warning) to depend on the competence of the Home Office.

 

No, I'm saying one cockup isn't something to base that sort of thing on. It's like saying you're never coming to London because you look like Jean Charles de Menezes and might get shot.

 

If it starts happening a lot, clearly it's a problem, but one case is not something to overreact to.

[fromageGB]

You are missing the point. If that can happen to US scientists in the UK before Brexit, then it could possibly happen to EU scientists in the UK after Brexit, depending on coming new immigration rules. (Of course, maybe Boris Johnson fooled you and his government will never actually implement rules to curb immigration from the EU. Ha ha, very funny.)

I know nothing about this beyond the article I read, but I think calling someone who studies Shakespearean history a scientist may be stretching things too far. Obviously he was detained because he was here illegally, the notification presumably being ignored, or lost in the post.

 

If we implement an Australian style system then no doubt we shall take in people who will in some way contribute to the economy in ways we desire or need, and no doubt we shall temporarily take in students who wish to study. I think it reasonable that there should be a limit to the duration of such study, though. Is 9 years of reading English history not enough? I don't expect the economy has gained much, but I do expect I have paid in some way to his education, even if only in EU grants and the costs of social and infrastructure support.

[fromageGB]

(how do I justify throwing out immigrants, if that is what Brexit means?)

It doesn't.

[shyams]

(how do I justify throwing out immigrants, if that is what Brexit means?).

It doesn't.

It does.

[Trinidad]

The problem is that the graph shows that Brexit voters are not able to understand it...

 

Rik

[WellSpyder]

The problem is that the graph shows that Brexit voters are not able to understand it...

So do we need to abandon the idea of democracy? Or perhaps replace the nineteenth (eighteenth?) century idea of a minimum property-holding requirement to be eligible to vote with a twenty-first century minimum intelligence requirement??

[RMB1]

So do we need to abandon the idea of democracy? Or perhaps replace the nineteenth (eighteenth?) century idea of a minimum property-holding requirement to be eligible to vote with a twenty-first century minimum intelligence requirement??

 

We should not rely on referendums. We should elect representatives and let them understand the issues and decide policy.

[mgoetze]

We should not rely on referendums. We should elect representatives and let themthe people who have enough money to lobby them understand the issues and decide policy.

FTFY.

[helene_t]

We should not rely on referendums. We should elect representatives and let them understand the issues and decide policy.

Yes but that is not the way it works in the UK.

 

The two major parties each elect their candidate in each constituency. Then the people can make a choice between those two. Whoever gets more votes of the two is elected, even if the majority would prefer the other guy (since the second choice of those who voted for a 3rd party doesn't matter).

 

And then there's the house of lords ....

 

So the UK is probably the least democratic country in Europe. Given that, I think it would be best to have as much direct democracy as possible.

[Zelandakh]

Yes but that is not the way it works in the UK.

 

The two major parties each elect their candidate in each constituency. Then the people can make a choice between those two.

People living in Scotland will find the idea of having an apparent choice between Labour and Conservative rather strange. It has been some years since there was such a 2-way marginal there.

[shyams]

People living in Scotland will find the idea of having an apparent choice between Labour and Conservative rather strange. It has been some years since there was such a 2-way marginal there.

You also forgot to point out a variety of punctuation errors and grammatical flaws in her post.

That would have further strengthened your reply -- and your hopes that others won't realise that your reply does not address the essence of her post one bit.

[shyams]

Fingers crossed, today's coup in the Labour team will remove Jeremy Corbyn.

 

If he had openly said he believes in Brexit, I'd at least respect him for being honest. IMO, he instead resorted to underhand techniques to depress the share of Labour voters choosing "Remain". And for that one act alone, he deserves to be relegated to the footnotes of history.

Alan Johnson, a key Labour leader and the designated head of the Labour "Remain" campaign, has just gone on record saying team Jeremy Corbyn was "undermining Remain campaign and was sanguine re. Brexit".

 

Fire him! Now!!

[Zelandakh]

You also forgot to point out a variety of punctuation errors and grammatical flaws in her post.

That would have further strengthened your reply -- and your hopes that others won't realise that your reply does not address the essence of her post one bit.

As a long-time supporter of PR I did not feel the need to write about that part. Do you think I should have written an extra paragraph or two just for your benefit when it had nothing to do with the essence of my post?

[Vampyr]

You also forgot to point out a variety of punctuation errors and grammatical flaws in her post.

That would have further strengthened your reply -- and your hopes that others won't realise that your reply does not address the essence of her post one bit.

 

Wow, what a f cked-up way to defend someone!

[cherdano]

I know nothing about this beyond the article I read, but I think calling someone who studies Shakespearean history a scientist may be stretching things too far. Obviously he was detained because he was here illegally, the notification presumably being ignored, or lost in the post.

 

This may be obvious to you, but it wasn't obvious to the Home Office.

 

(...) the Home Office finally issued a statement on the case on Wednesday afternoon, at about the same time he was released.

 

It said: “The Immigration Act 2014 clearly states that a person who does not have leave to remain in the UK is liable for removal. Enforcement action may be taken to remove these individuals.”

 

The Home Office also issued guidance that although a person must be notified of their liability to be removed from the UK, “this can be on the same date as an enforcement visit”.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/american-shakespeare-expert-paul-hamilton-attacks-brazen-unapologetic-and-cynical-home-office-after-a6837986.html

 

Does that change your position in any way?

[fromageGB]

Does that change your position in any way?

Which one? I am happy to confirm that I believe the UK should grant temporary visas for study and other purposes, and I believe that on expiry of the visa or its renewals, the holder should leave the country, and - should he not do so voluntarily - be removed. The "decision to remove him was taken on 9 December last year", and I doubt that the home office failed to notify him of that fact. I also very much doubt that the "decision to remove" was not made after the expiry had failed to be followed up by voluntary relocation. I also very much doubt that a scholar who spends his life reading the writings of others failed to read the termination date on his visa.

 

So yes, I support his removal. And the home office processes.

[cherdano]

Which one? I am happy to confirm that I believe the UK should grant temporary visas for study and other purposes, and I believe that on expiry of the visa or its renewals, the holder should leave the country, and - should he not do so voluntarily - be removed. The "decision to remove him was taken on 9 December last year", and I doubt that the home office failed to notify him of that fact. I also very much doubt that the "decision to remove" was not made after the expiry had failed to be followed up by voluntary relocation. I also very much doubt that a scholar who spends his life reading the writings of others failed to read the termination date on his visa.

 

So yes, I support his removal. And the home office processes.

 

This is just a great example of how biased you are - you aren't even able to get the fact straight.

The rules in this case say that the Scholar is allowed to stay in the country after his VISA is expired, as long as the decision on his request for leave to remain is pending.

 

- The scholar claims he was never notified that his request for leave was denied before he was arrested (and he has the right to stay in the UK as long as the decision on his request is pending).

- The Home Office specifically clarified that they think it is ok to detain someone ON THE SAME DAY when they learn they have to leave the country (which in this case means the day he learns that his request has been denied).

- Yet fromageGB assumes that the scholar has been informed of the denial of his request much earlier, and failed to follow his duty to leave the country. That would require the scholar to have lied. And fromageGB automatically assumes that the Home Office would never do what it said it could do.

 

 

Such a strong bias in understanding the FACTS of this case easiest to explain by a strong pre-existing bias against foreigners. That's usually called xenophobia.

 

You have a right to your opinions. But you can't pretend that the policies you would like to see won't lead to human suffering.

[cloa513]

The problem is that the graph shows that Brexit voters are not able to understand it...

 

Rik

The people with degrees get bribes (they call them grants and a chance with it highlypaid non-merit based jobs but we know what they really are) from the EU to say how wonder the EU is as it does its anti-democratic destructive policies. I read someone write that local laws override EU directives- if so every country would override EU directive (e.g. one simple law- all companies can ignore EU directives) and it would be meaningless- if you override EU directive then your country will fined and forced to repell such laws. Local laws are compelled to be inline with EU directives.

[fromageGB]

And fromageGB automatically assumes that the Home Office would never do what it said it could do.

This is wrong. I do assume, and indeed expect that, the home office detains people prior to repatriation if they suspect they are trying to avoid it.

[NickRW]

We should not rely on referendums. We should elect representatives and let them understand the issues and decide policy.

 

Er. No. Certainly not to the extent that they start giving away the powers we elected them to wield to other bodies that we never agreed to and didn't elect.

[helene_t]

The people with degrees get bribes

QFT

[NickRW]

The problem is that the graph shows that Brexit voters are not able to understand it...

 

Rik

 

The fact that the more educated a person is the more likely they are to have voted remain, does not prove or really even suggest that those who voted to leave were unable to understand matters.

 

Indeed such a view is arguably as badly prejudiced as, for example, the idiots who have recently been responsible for a rise in racial or ethnic prejudice. You're merely basing your prejudice on possession of a piece of paper instead of skin colour or accent of voice.

[Cyberyeti]

I hate the way the remain campaign characterise the Brexiteers as ill-educated racists. I don't know many people who voted out in person, but they would be characterised as well educated, politically aware and working in finance.

 

example: from one non-UK EU country, wife from another, masters in economics, worked in investment banking all over the world

 

Not revealing how I voted, but I thought it was a relatively close decision and made my mind up in the last couple of days.

 

I'd be interested in some of the other statistician forumites' take on the diagram of propensity to vote remain against education level, since the older you are, the less likely you are to have a degree, and the older you are the more likely you are to vote leave, isn't the pattern to be expected ?