I would rather have a permanent top-level tracking banner section built right into my browser as long as I don't have to write JS anymore. It's very high on my priority list.
I know of a lot of British people who do not want Scotland to be part of the UK. They get more funding per head, their own government and then complain they are unfairly treated.
Personally, I think you do deserve a second referendum. The remain/leave map shows a clear border. Northumberland votes out. North of that, its all remain.
The biggest thing to me is that many in the leave camp used very similar arguments against the leave camp in the Scottish indy ref.
That and the EU/better together camp said Scotland wouldn't be part of the EU if they left and should therefore stay.
Note: from Manchester. Voted remain. Don't see the SNP as the national threat they're portrayed to be.
"Personally, I think you do deserve a second referendum. The remain/leave map shows a clear border. Northumberland votes out. North of that, its all remain."
It's tough luck. You can't threaten to quit every time things don't work out for you.
"The biggest thing to me is that many in the leave camp used very similar arguments against the leave camp in the Scottish indy ref."
I don't think anybody envisioned we would actually leave.
"That and the EU/better together camp said Scotland wouldn't be part of the EU if they left and should therefore stay."
It's not entirely clear that Scotland will be able to join the EU anyway. There's a long waiting list and large payment required.
"Note: from Manchester. Voted remain. Don't see the SNP as the national threat they're portrayed to be."
I also voted remain. I'm not afraid of the threat of Scotland to the rest of the UK, I'm afraid of Scotland's threat to itself.
What will be interesting now is whether Scotland really has the economy to survive on their own in the EU. Other smaller Countries have not yet been successful.
Scotland and London are the only two regions that pay their own way. The rest live off subsidies from the UK and Europe. The ironies and cognitive dissonance of little Englanders never ceases.
Since this is a fact, you see some very odd and contorted phrases to imply otherwise. One classic is to say that Scotland spends more than it earns. Which is entirely true, Scotland runs a deficit. What isn't mentioned is that the UK as a whole runs a deficit. But Leave voters have shown themselves to be very susceptible to propaganda as long as it talks down "the other".
"Scotland and London are the only two regions that pay their own way. The rest live off subsidies from the UK and Europe. The ironies and cognitive dissonance of little Englanders never ceases."
I assume you don't live in England, or if you do you live in one of those two areas. It's not true at all. A lot of people travel daily to larger cities to work, making them look better than they are.
"What isn't mentioned is that the UK as a whole runs a deficit."
It's more about them running at more of a deficit. If you don't believe me, believe the Scottish [1].
"But Leave voters have shown themselves to be very susceptible to propaganda as long as it talks down "the other"."
I'm not a leave voter, if you're trying to use that against me.
Did you even read the link you hastily googled? Spoiler warning, it confirms what I said in my comment:
“As official figures show, Scotland has paid more in tax per head than the rest of the UK in each of the last 30 years and we contribute a higher share of UK revenues than we receive in public spending.”
That's fair, it takes a while to get into it. I admit I was wrong.
They still run a deficit though and need a financial market strong enough for people to invest in. It'll not be the walk in the park a lot of people think it may be. There will be some really hard times to come if thr decision comes to leaving the UK.
I'm still not convinced it is in Scotland's interests.
I'm on the fence myself, but making decisions based on patently false information has a bad track record in the very recent past.
And if they'll falsely accuse the Scots of "stealing" from them, falsely accuse immigrants of being bad for the economy, then really, who is safe in this post-fact politics?
I wish I could enjoy the looks on the Conservative Remain sides faces, as they process losing to a bunch of sociopathic liars. But schadenfreude is probably banned in post-Brexit Britain.
"I'm on the fence myself, but making decisions based on patently false information has a bad track record in the very recent past."
I very much agree. Ultimately, the difference between me and them is I admit when I'm wrong - rather than just digging a larger hole.
"And if they'll falsely accuse the Scots of "stealing" from them, falsely accuse immigrants of being bad for the economy, then really, who is safe in this post-fact politics?"
I think the UK really needs to go under reform regardless. I think if you're an MP or civil servant and you are caught lying, there should be some legal consequence. If you're paid by the tax payer and accept bribes or are dishonest, you have no place in UK politics.
What's really annoying is the only reason the Royal Family is still involved is to keep an eye on things. Well oh how they have slipped.
"I wish I could enjoy the looks on the Conservative Remain sides faces, as they process losing to a bunch of sociopathic liars. But schadenfreude is probably banned in post-Brexit Britain."
I feel bad for them. Perhaps the worst part is realising you're fighting for a Country that isn't worth saving.
Currently a lot of fincancial products can be created and managed in London, since once approved there, they are automatically approved in all other EU member states, too.
This of course will have to change once the UK has left the EU, making the people involved in these processes one of the first to be moved to Franfkurt etc.
One of the main attractions of London as a banking centre is its EU membership. Sure, there are others, but it seems extremely likely that companies will relocate because they judge access to the EU market as more important.
Underestimating the soft diplomatic skills of the English. It has always been their strength, not treaties. In no time you will see London be an Asian financial hub. They didn't need to be one before because they had it easy with the EU. But when they lose that business, they'll get to work in Asia. The distance won't matter.
Europe has been unable to recreate Silicon Valley for a large number of reasons none of which have anything to do with why they can't move their financial center to Frankfurt.
Just a couple of them:
- no single language market of 300M people
- different attitude towards investment
- different attitude towards entrepreneurship
- no reason to cluster that much in such a small space
In fact, the US has been unable to 'recreate Silicon Valley', it's a world-wide accidental one-off and drawing parallels between its one-off-existence, lack of being replicated anywhere at all and the fact that London was a banking capital before the EU existed does nothing to guarantee Londons continued existence as a banking capital outside an otherwise unified EU once a large number of very relevant parties pulls out and is drawing very strange conclusions out of unrelated data.
The biggest hits from the brexit will be felt in London and it is already happening.
> Europe has been unable to recreate Silicon Valley for a large number of reasons none of which have anything to do with why they can't move their financial center to Frankfurt.
I'd argue that a lot of the reasons overlap. The key ones being: pre-existing access to capital, access to talent, and tolerance for risk-taking.
Capital is very easy to move (and is already moving), banking talent is not rare and tolerance for risk taking? We're talking about banking here. The tolerance for risk taking in banking goes just so far that you are not fired if the risk is covered before you are found out. Start-ups and banking have very little to do with each other.
I'd like to see a start-up succeed under the kind of risk-averse attitude that's prevalent in a bank and the kind of reporting duties they have.
Note that NYC is the banking center of the United States (and to some extent of the world) and that NYC also did not manage to re-create Silicon Valley.
20-somethings at Wall Street and City firms are making billion dollar trades--ones where even a small amount of risk can yield huge losses. That takes an appetite for risk. Those firms have pipelines funneling in the top graduates from the top schools. They've got access to (rare) talent. They've got the connections with individual and institutional investors that can raise billions of dollars on tight timelines to finance mergers, acquisitions, or expansion. That's access to capital that could move but isn't necessarily going to. And they've got a well-developed supporting infrastructure of accountants, lawyers, and analysts helping to keep the gears turning.
These are good points and I don't understand the downvotes. Silicon Valley is great ecosystem for startups but once they start to grow big, they do need financial services from the many many firms on wall street. That is a different kind of talent and I think SV (and perhaps HN as well) fails to understand the importance of the availability of capital instruments and prudent financial advice that is available so easily just across the country.
There might not be an EU by the time Scotland gets a vote to secede
Doubtful: As long as France and Germany are on board, the EU will survive in some fashion.
The comment[1] of German economist Max Otte[2] regarding the British vote? Good riddance, now we can stop accomodating UK sensibilities. Also remember, when the UK wanted to join the EEC? De Gaulle sent them packing twice...
> Doubtful: As long as France and Germany are on board, the EU will survive in some fashion.
I would go further than that, while you are absolutely right, long before we reach that point we have the "second core" of Belgium, Italy and Spain, none of which are actually leaving anytime soon. Can add Portugal, Austria and Luxembourg as a "sure takers" third wave.
It's from 2014 (so in particular before the refugee crisis), but a look at Special Eurobarometer 415 [1] might still be instructive, eg QA13.3 [2]. This could have saved Cameron some embarrassment...
> Doubtful: As long as France and Germany are on board, the EU will survive in some fashion.
I disagree. The UK was the third largest net contributor to the EU, and one of only ~10 member states that have historically made positive net contributions.
Its influence and role as a net importer from the EU will see it win a relatively favorable exit, including access to the single market.
The UK exit, in addition to the financial impact on the EU, will inspire many other member states on the verge of leaving to do the same.
The EU is already on thin ice, and the UK voting to leave may have just been the straw that broke the camel's back.
> Its influence and role as a net importer from the EU will see it win a relatively favorable exit, including access to the single market.
> The UK exit, in addition to the financial impact on the EU, will inspire many other member states on the verge of leaving to do the same.
I disagree, UK will not have an easy exit exactly for the reason you say. It will make leaving an easy thing.
And you only see the economical part, UK has been seen in the rest of the EU as an obstacle to the EU and closer to USA than UE.
Right now, they don't have so much sympathies apart from some far right parties. And I wouldn't like to be friend with them
Between Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders they can still do a lot of damage to those countries but NL without the EU is a joke and France has way too much to lose (more than the UK did) so I highly doubt (hope?) that this will not come to pass.
Le Pen has less elected member of parliament than I have fingers on one of my hands (and I have the regular five fingers by hand).
Even in their "great swipe" of 2014, they got 14 mayors total. In a country counting roughly 36 000 mayors (yes, I know ...).
The FN is actually very very weak, it keeps being seen doing huge jump forwards in numbers but that's mostly because the others are being very dumb and for the FN a single new member of parliament is a 50% jump ahead, which makes for a good headline.
The FN biggest strength is actually the media attention they get and how it drives them forward, there was a study about that showing they were te party being given the most media attention and it giving them the biggest result boost (despite "we are ignored by the media" being on their main card, like all populist parties)
Absolutely correct. Please note up front that I no longer vote, and I don't really care who wins the election.
That said, I've been watching elections and presidential politics in the US very closely since Watergate. Trump is very likely to win this election. There are many factors in play that the pundit and pollster class don't understand, and don't seem to care to understand. In this scenario, both the large crowds (polls) and the moderate crowds (expert panels) are likely to miss the mark by wide margins.
This is not because the experts lack expertise, but rather because this election has some unusual features that have not been seen for a couple of generations at least, and their models (mental and statistical) don't seem to be taking account of that. Humans have a nasty habit of switching motives without notice.
1) To become as mainstream in a general-purpose way as OOP and functional programming paradigms are. One of the problems I know is lack of composability.
Historically, (1) has not particularly depended on merit, and (2) would require a lot (because "nice atoms" were more interesting back in the 60s than today).
