Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

howtobrexit.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 142 posts

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#61

Post by dalore »

martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

The Brexiteers who keep complaining about having a second (third?) referendum doesn't stop because people will just keep having referendums until they get the answer they want fail to see that's the point of referendums.

A referendum should be held on major political stuff (like leaving the EU or Scotland leaving the UK) if national polls have pinged the opinion at least 60%, and then it should also require a higher majority (like 60%) to change. This ensures a big major change happens if it's really wanted, but for very divisive issues it will take time.

So yes we should keep having a Brexit referendum if the national polls start getting 60% support, until then it's not worth it. And it should require more than 60% otherwise if you go 50% like now, you have half the country hating the other half. If we kept the status quo, then the brexit people would have had to keep up and slowly change peoples opinion so the majority of the country agree.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#62

Post by keithpeter »

songshu wrote: post #52
martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

The problem with Brexit is that "leave the European Union" is not a policy, it's an outcome. All of the thinking about how to do it should have taken place before the vote, and then we could have voted on that (this is actually the way legislation is typically developed in the UK, and the job of our sometime venerated civil service). Compare it to the recent Irish referendum on abortion, where there was a clear plan…

Cameron did the 'either / or' thing three times, once on House of Lords reform, once on Scots independence and latterly on Brexit. Won the first two, came a-cropper on the third.

Personally, I'm against referendums of any kind.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#63

Post by slacka »

martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

I disagree with your conclusion because you are not considering external factors. The issue isn't majority vote. The problem is many of the voters were not properly informed about the consequences of their decision. More importantly, many voters were misinformed by an external disinfo campaign.[1] [2]

A better informed electorate would have prevented Brexit. We don't allow foreign countries to air political ads. It's time social media policies caught up.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...

[2] https://www.euronews.com/2018/02/12/new-report-concludes-rus...

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#64

Post by ben_w »

martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

Perhaps oddly, despite being on the losing side of this referendum, I have not change my mind about the value and importance of even simple majority referendums (referenda?) like the one I just lost.

Rather, I think it is absolutely important to inform the electorate and to make sure that propaganda is effectively prevented. I have literally no idea how to do any of that.

If “the people” cannot be convinced of your arguments, then the arguments suck — and one thing I’ve been amazed at since the referendum is how severely all of the talking heads in the UK, Remain and Leave both, have persistently failed to connect with any issue of importance to the other side.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#65

Post by dalore »

clubm8 wrote: post #19
bilbo0s wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only winning move is not to play ... That's a losing move too. The Leave voters would all label you 'undemocratic'. That sentiment imposes a definite cost on you as well. Unfortunately, at this point there really are no " winning " moves. Probably just a few moves that might be less bad than other moves.

>The Leave voters will all call you undemocratic. That sentiment imposes a definite cost on you as well. This is the same country that has the queen give "consent" for all legislation, correct? What exactly is the point of the monarchy if they won't step in during this serious issue to act as the "adult in the room"?

The Queen (or let's say monarchy) is a check on parliamentary powers. They are like the USA president. It's not better or worse, it's just a different way of keeping powers in check. She has the power to dissolve the government and not pass those laws but the people would be up in arms. But if the politicians get locked she/they can fix it. Very rarely happens but it does (see Australia in the 1970s). The commonwealth countries are similar but instead of the Queen they have a governor general which is her representative.

If she went and dissolved parliament now, during the Brexit negotiations everyone would rightly say she is interfering with democratic process.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#66

Post by mrighele »

conanite wrote: post #25

Scotland and NI quit UK to form their own republic and rejoin EU together. Everyone happy. Maybe even republic of Scotland-Ireland.

Rejoining EU would not be automatic. They will have to to again all the accession iter.

EU countries that have issues with independence movements (e.g. Spain w.r.t Catalonia) will not let automatic re-join, because the "You will be out of EU if you secede" is one of the arguments used for saying that secession is a bad move.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#67

Post by [deleted] »

Kalium wrote: post #35
martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

California is a good example of what happens when pretty much any policy can be set by simple majority vote. The result is, to be kind about it, a lot of room for improvement.

[deleted]

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#68

Post by Latteland »

The current situation is so depressing. The combined ongoing destruction in the uk and the us of many years of relative safety and peace while claiming it's all to protect us from change or something like that reminds me that the many poor leaders and failures of ancient countries making terrible decisions that lead to the end of their countries can happen now. What a run on sentence. At the same time, I'm extremely fortunate to have a great job and be part of the "programmer class". So many people in both countries have lost their economic confidence and a job that pays for a decent lifestyle.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#69

Post by greeneggs »

Kalium wrote: post #35
martythemaniak wrote: post #31

Brexit has definitely changed my mind on one thing - majority vote in a referendum is bad. Or rather, the percentage vote required should be proportional to the gravity of the question. Referendums are rare, so most votes should require well over 50%. I did not used to think this. In 2007 British Columbia had a referendum on switching to proportional representation from FPTP. The result was like 52% in favour, but th…

California is a good example of what happens when pretty much any policy can be set by simple majority vote. The result is, to be kind about it, a lot of room for improvement.

It isn't.

Since Proposition 13 passed in 1978 (by a simple majority), California has required 2/3 majority votes in the legislature to increase taxes, and 2/3 majority votes for local elections to increase taxes.

Re: How to Brexit? – Explore the (im)possibilities of the different Brexit scenarios

#70

Post by microcolonel »

zimablue wrote: post #59

This is actually terrible, for one thing the bridges don't move independently, you click one and another moves, making it FEEL deceptive and not allowing you to easily work out the whole problem space or why. They should move independently and if the configuration doesn't make sense, tell you. For another thing, it conflates economic disalignment with having a hard border, the whole argument of the UK government is t…

This map also completely ignores the Isle of Man. Seems like the same idle whinging that got them into the scenario w.r.t. negotiations.
Post reply on HN