abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Amsterdam is not bad, but very compact.
Paris is chaotic.
Dublin has an infrastructure deficit.
I wouldn't be so quick to write off Scotland.
- Status
Amsterdam is not bad, but very compact.
Paris is chaotic.
Dublin has an infrastructure deficit.
I wouldn't be so quick to write off Scotland.
Paris is also Francophone. Ex-pats may rather live in a city where they mostly already speak the language.
The prices in Dublin are high and in Amsterdam are even higher.
Scotland looks pretty good to me.
Rolfe
Adult human female
One thing I expect to happen is Edinburgh and environs prices going up quite a bit - even more so than they are. Edinburgh will become a major international capital city in one bound, and there will be a lot of interest in property there. I note that France seems to be pre-empting that by leasing a highly desirable property in Edinburgh which looks more like a potential embassy than simply a relocation for its consulate as we're led to believe.
https://stv.tv/news/east-central/13...-sets-sights-on-historic-registrars-building/
I remember a weird conversation with an English woman during the first independence referendum. She came out of her house to demand that I remove the Yes Scotland leaflet I'd just put into the letter box which was on the outside of her garden gate. The gist of the matter was that she was English but she found Scotland a pleasant place to live, however she would be so offended by Scotland becoming independent that she couldn't bear to continue living here. She would take it as a personal rejection.
I resisted the urge to advise her not to let the door hit her arse on the way out, and indeed my chances of getting a word in edgeways weren't good. She gestured to her house - this one - set in a beautiful garden in beautiful countryside only about a 40-minute drive from the centre of Edinburgh, and said "who would possibly want to buy that after independence?" I suggested it might command a high price from a banker or a diplomat who preferred country to city living, and she sneered "nobody will want to come here!"
I gather she, and her daughter who owned another extremely nice house nearby, have moved away anyway. I try not to think "good riddance", but I do.
Scotland is one of the most aesthetically beautiful countries on the planet. It has a capital city the size of a modest town elsewhere, the centre of which is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It has way more than its share of top-100 universities and one of the most highly educated workforces in Europe. The country has a reputation for innovation and original thought, and also for friendliness and a welcoming attitude to strangers. Its links as a trading partner with European centres go back over 700 years, with documents in existence showing membership of the Hanseatic League in the 13th century. Scots "free ports" in the Low Countries and the "auld alliance" with France are well-known. And everybody speaks English.
Of course other countries have plus points and things going for them too, but Scotland can't take 100% of the business that's going to want out of England in any case. I certainly wouldn't write off our chances of securing a goodly share. I don't think house price increases are a good thing, but having said that I expect the value of my own house (also a pleasant, large-ish property set in a conservation village amid beautiful scenery only 40 minutes drive from the centre of Edinburgh) to go up a fair bit too.
https://stv.tv/news/east-central/13...-sets-sights-on-historic-registrars-building/
I remember a weird conversation with an English woman during the first independence referendum. She came out of her house to demand that I remove the Yes Scotland leaflet I'd just put into the letter box which was on the outside of her garden gate. The gist of the matter was that she was English but she found Scotland a pleasant place to live, however she would be so offended by Scotland becoming independent that she couldn't bear to continue living here. She would take it as a personal rejection.
I resisted the urge to advise her not to let the door hit her arse on the way out, and indeed my chances of getting a word in edgeways weren't good. She gestured to her house - this one - set in a beautiful garden in beautiful countryside only about a 40-minute drive from the centre of Edinburgh, and said "who would possibly want to buy that after independence?" I suggested it might command a high price from a banker or a diplomat who preferred country to city living, and she sneered "nobody will want to come here!"
I gather she, and her daughter who owned another extremely nice house nearby, have moved away anyway. I try not to think "good riddance", but I do.
Scotland is one of the most aesthetically beautiful countries on the planet. It has a capital city the size of a modest town elsewhere, the centre of which is a UNESCO World Heritage Site. It has way more than its share of top-100 universities and one of the most highly educated workforces in Europe. The country has a reputation for innovation and original thought, and also for friendliness and a welcoming attitude to strangers. Its links as a trading partner with European centres go back over 700 years, with documents in existence showing membership of the Hanseatic League in the 13th century. Scots "free ports" in the Low Countries and the "auld alliance" with France are well-known. And everybody speaks English.
Of course other countries have plus points and things going for them too, but Scotland can't take 100% of the business that's going to want out of England in any case. I certainly wouldn't write off our chances of securing a goodly share. I don't think house price increases are a good thing, but having said that I expect the value of my own house (also a pleasant, large-ish property set in a conservation village amid beautiful scenery only 40 minutes drive from the centre of Edinburgh) to go up a fair bit too.
I see that
There is one thing that is telling and that it's not being stressed enough.
No one is talking about business moving into UK. Many businesses have plans to move out of UK, in whole or in part. Basically no businesses have plans to move to UK from EU.
That's important because Theresa May and her cabinet of clowns speak of great business deals and whatnot. Clearly those who will actually put their money on the line aren't impressed. The thing is, the economic growth is largely dependent on impressing just those people. This factor essentially proves the discussion of economic impact of Brexit is basically a calculation of how much worse off UK will be as a result. The only polls that would be relevant then are those who ask of how would you vote, if you were X worse off if UK exited EU?
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...exit-worse-off-tim-farron-ukip-lib-dem-yougov
(...) The British public will not accept a Brexit deal that leaves them worse off financially, a new poll suggests. In a sign that a majority of the public would be unwilling to accept an economically damaging hard Brexit, half of those who voted to leave the EU in June, including 62% of Labour voters and 59% of those in the north, would not be willing to lose any money at all as a consequence of Britain’s withdrawal.
Just one in 10 would be willing to lose more than £100 a month. (...)
This are the numbers and polls Bremainers should be working with, especially right now. Brexitards are massively overplaying their hand, and you guys are massively underplaying it.
McHrozni
The Brexiteer line is as follows:
- You can't trust polls, they always underestimate support for Brexit
- We only have forecasts about whether people will be worse off under Brexit, you cannot trust forecasts, you cannot trust experts
- In any case Brexit will be a resounding success - unless those foreign meanies scupper it
- In any case there will be short-term turbulence but we won't feel the true benefits of Brexit for decades
- It's not about the economy, it's about control over immigration (although that is reversed if it's suggested that enthusiastic Brexiteers are racist xenophobes)
Remainers have been banging on about the fact that we will almost certainly be far worse off but the Great British PublicTM seem largely impervious to that message
Although not likely to remain so unless Edinburgh city Council get their planning act together.
The Brexiteer line is as follows:
- You can't trust polls, they always underestimate support for Brexit
- We only have forecasts about whether people will be worse off under Brexit, you cannot trust forecasts, you cannot trust experts
- In any case Brexit will be a resounding success - unless those foreign meanies scupper it
- In any case there will be short-term turbulence but we won't feel the true benefits of Brexit for decades
- It's not about the economy, it's about control over immigration (although that is reversed if it's suggested that enthusiastic Brexiteers are racist xenophobes)
Remainers have been banging on about the fact that we will almost certainly be far worse off but the Great British PublicTM seem largely impervious to that message
You know, even if the polls massively underestimate support for Brexit if it leaves them 100 pounds worse off and the actual support is three times higher ... this still makes for better than 2 to 1 ratio in favor for Bremain. In reality, the polls under-count support for Brexit by about their margin of error.
Bremainers aren't being heard because political leadership utterly failed in its tasks. There is little visible opposition to Theresa May from her party, which is perhaps to be expected. However there is no opposition worth mentioning to her disastrous scheme from the opposition either. If Corbyn the Traitor did his job as the leader of most loyal opposition the discussions about Brexit would be significantly different now. Instead, he colluded with Tories to ensure Britain will suffer.
McHrozni
Although it did seem like most of the conservative government including May campaigned to remain in the EU. The notable equivocator was Corbyn hardly a noted right winger. I think it was generally thought the left wing were the weak side on remain. The perception was it was the wealthy elite and establishment that were for the EU.
You are welcome to be anti Tory, but it not true that the Tory party campaigned for Brexit to get right wing bs.
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
This is for, ahem, a "friend"
Let us imagine a scenario where Brexit actually happens, and Scotland (and perhaps Northern Ireland) exits the UK, and remains in the European Union (by whatever means). What do you think would happen to house prices in Scotland ? Would there be a massive rush of people on the remain side into Scotland ?
Part of those firms which may decide to relocate in Ireland, may decide to relocate in Scotland instead. So there would be some pressure on houses prices, but I am not sure it would be evaluated at this point in time, or even likely.
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
I agree 100%, IMO Corbyn has failed in his job as leader of the opposition by failing to challenge the government on the most important decision that the UK has had to make since 1939. He has failed to do his job as leader of the Labour Party by making the party even more disunited than usual. He has failed as a politician by failing to get wide scale support for any of his key policy ideas.
Then again, there is a paucity of alternatives around at the moment
IMO that' true. The Labour Party never made the case for EU membership based on protection of workers' rights, protection of the environment and protection of consumers' rights. IMO that's largely due to Jeremy Corbyn, his lacklustre support for the Remain campaign (which IMO has been shown to have been feigned) and his failure to appear passionate about anything.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Yeah. I didn't actually say any of it. And there are limits. She was being extremely rude.
Sadly, that is all too true. Bunch of idiots.
For goodness sake, as most in this thread know I was against and still remain against leaving the EU but that is the decision that was made. It would be very undemocratic (in UK terms) for the "loyal opposition" to oppose the "will of the people". Their job at the moment is the make the best of a bad decision and try and hold the tories feet to the fire. Let's critise the Labour washouts for not doing the job they should be doing which again is not to oppose the UK leaving the EU but ensuring the government does a good job of that leaving.
WE ARE LEAVING THE EU
WE ARE LEAVING THE EU
We are, and thanks to the Labour Party's complete failure to hold the government to account, it's going to be an economically disasterous Hard Brexit.
Quite honestly I cannot see what will change......
3point14
Pi
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 23,212
Things will start to get very bad before the UK leaving the EU is absolutely finalised.
Article 50 could probably be reversed just as the UK is entering a depression.
The EU might be very nice and let us back in at that point, provided we accept the Euro.
By that point, all of the service industries that pay so much of UK income tax (via their employees) will have left and won't come back.
I'm living in cloud cuckoo land. It's the only way to stay sane.
Article 50 could probably be reversed just as the UK is entering a depression.
The EU might be very nice and let us back in at that point, provided we accept the Euro.
By that point, all of the service industries that pay so much of UK income tax (via their employees) will have left and won't come back.
I'm living in cloud cuckoo land. It's the only way to stay sane.
No. You are leaving the EU under the terms of conditions dictated by a bunch of clowns who are unable to come up with anything resembling a strategy in eight months. Pretty much every indicator shows their actions will significantly impact the UK in a negative way. It is the right and the duty of the opposition in democracy to oppose the government in actions that will be bad for the country. The Traitor didn't need to oppose Brexit to moderate the damage it would cause. You don't need to be against Brexit to oppose the way it is being handled.
At a minimum I would expect the Traitor to vote against triggering A50 until the White paper was published, studied, discussed in the Parliament and amended insofar this was possible. Instead, he voted in favor the day before it was even published, turning Westminster into Russian Duma.
The entire process is a charade.
As you say here:
Their job at the moment is the make the best of a bad decision and try and hold the tories feet to the fire. Let's critise the Labour washouts for not doing the job they should be doing which again is not to oppose the UK leaving the EU but ensuring the government does a good job of that leaving.
There is only way to make Brexit work right now - it is to oppose it until the government is able to produce a scenario which isn't catastrophic for UK. If this government isn't capable of doing that, it is time for the government to be replaced with one that will. If the elected parliament isn't able to do construct such a government, then a new one who might be should be elected.
And lastly, if the newly elected parliament isn't able to do so then maybe, just maybe, Brexit just doesn't have the democratic credentials it's purported to have, referendum or no.
McHrozni
Last edited:
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
Just for clarity I didn't say the Tories campaigned for Brexit because of their right-wing BS, I said that the Brexit campaigners who claimed to want their sovereignty back only wanted it back so they could implement their right wing BS.
They disagreed with what the EU was doing and therefore they decided they had to sink the ship because they knew they couldn't change its course.
Sovereignty is one of those things like 'British culture' that is wheeled out when it's convenient and is largely meaningless.
More news about the cost of Brexit (or a rehash of the same news)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39042876
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39042876
- Status