Live data from Hacker News

Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

nytimes.com

191–200 of 1001 posts

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#191
post #160
post #117

I loved the comparison to a submarine made of cheese: https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/1072222230791229440?l...

>Theresa May was initially against building a submarine out of cheese, obviously. Because it’s a completely insane thing to do. Leaving the EU is not a completely insane thing to do. The UK (and many other countries) have legitimate grievances about some things the EU is foisting on them (immigration for example) and the EU is giving them the cold shoulder and fining them if they don't comply. Labelling people who ar…

> Leaving the EU is not a completely insane thing to do.

Leaving is not insane in itself. Leaving with a favorable deal with questionable leverage is irrational. Not sure if insane, but at least it's borderline fantasyland

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#192
post #71

Of course it "failed". The government did everything it could to sabotage it and arrive at as unfavorable a set of exit conditions as possible. Even if she did want to get a good deal, May doesn't strike me as a cutthroat negotiator. Couple this with her unwillingness to abide by the will of the people (the size of the voting margin is somewhat irrelevant in a properly functioning democracy), and you get this. This w…

>as unfavorable a set of exit conditions as possible

Have you read the deal? I have.

The deal says that after the transition period there are no on-going arrangements. E.g. It's a no deal brexit.

The deal arranges what happens around the exit (E.g. so that if you buy something the day before, it still has to be delivered to you the day after).

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#193
post #71

Of course it "failed". The government did everything it could to sabotage it and arrive at as unfavorable a set of exit conditions as possible. Even if she did want to get a good deal, May doesn't strike me as a cutthroat negotiator. Couple this with her unwillingness to abide by the will of the people (the size of the voting margin is somewhat irrelevant in a properly functioning democracy), and you get this. This w…

Brexit has been sabotaged by a conspiracy by May? You seriously believe she is devious enough? This is tin-foil hat nonsense.

Brexit is and will be a failure by definition - simply because it was never specified exactly what it involved. There are 1000s of ways to NOT be a member of the EU. "Brexit" covers all of them so leave-supporting politicians have been arguing furiously on the basis that their particular version of "not being in the EU anymore" reflects the "will of the people".

The "Leave" movement consisted of many incompatible positions on the future relationship - this was made clear in the run up to the referendum. Many Brexit supporters advocated a Norway (EEA) type relationship, others wanted to stay in the Customs Union, others wanted a Canada free trade type of relationship, for other the European Court of Justice was the red line, for a significant number immigrants were the problem, etc.

Surprise, surprise, no matter what May presented was going to be objectionable to a majority particularly if you include the remain supporters. There is no conspiracy required to see that this circle is impossible to square.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#194
post #144

I'll be the first to admit: I'm an American. I fundamentally do not understand Brexit. I understand the following timeline: 1. A largely disseminated, nation-wide vote occurs, bolstered by nationalist sentiment, that the EU is bad for the UK. This vote results in a conclusion that UK should leave the EU. 2. This is controversial, due to the majority of the populace in general not desiring to leave the EU, but not vot…

May's deal permanently blocks the UK from ever fully leaving the EU without the EU's permission, meaning that anyone who wants to leave won't support it. It also removes almost all the benefits of remaining in the EU, meaning Remain supporters hate it too. Oh, and for bonus points it effectively makes Northern Ireland no longer fully part of the UK, meaning that the DUP (the Northern Ireland unionist party which the…

The UK is a sovereign country -- how is it possible for them to never be able to do something without someone else's permission?

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#195
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was, nevertheless, the directly expressed will of the people. This is very much the social contract that holds the society together, and makes the government accountable to the people. Would you rather they just did as they please?

Polling has pretty consistently been anti-Brexit for awhile now, once the clear scope of what Brexit entails has actually been better understood. If another referendum were held today it would fail. Why should a single non-binding vote taken at one point in time two years ago be considered forever irrevocable? Especially considering all of the pro-Brexit fake news and false promises at the time? Most of the promises…

Well the way EU is sticking it the UK would be reason enough to leave.

Assuming the UK wants to remain a sovereign nation rather than an EU client.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#196
post #71

Of course it "failed". The government did everything it could to sabotage it and arrive at as unfavorable a set of exit conditions as possible. Even if she did want to get a good deal, May doesn't strike me as a cutthroat negotiator. Couple this with her unwillingness to abide by the will of the people (the size of the voting margin is somewhat irrelevant in a properly functioning democracy), and you get this. This w…

What sort of "good deal" do you think May could realistically have extracted from the EU? Everything I've read has implied that the Brexit options ranged from "poor" to "apocalyptically bad".

Is that what they say on TV nowadays? Somehow Britain existed for 2 thousand years without the EU all the way until 1973, and now for it to exist without the EU (and presumably with stronger ties to the US) would be "apocalyptically" bad? This doesn't pass the sniff test, IMO.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure. I think we’ll leave or stay in the EU and it won’t make a tangible difference in the long run. Not in the way that say the internet, smartphones, antibiotics, nuclear weapons/power, quantum physics etc etc have made a difference to the world. MAD means we probably won’t have a major war any time soon, so we’ll be trading with the EU regardless, it’s all semanitics and minor politics.

MAD's not really a thing unfortunately. Nuclear winter was always a myth.

It doesn't take nuclear winter for countries to make the decision that "if I nuke them they will nuke me and that will be bad".

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#199

I'll be the first to admit: I'm an American. I fundamentally do not understand Brexit. I understand the following timeline: 1. A largely disseminated, nation-wide vote occurs, bolstered by nationalist sentiment, that the EU is bad for the UK. This vote results in a conclusion that UK should leave the EU. 2. This is controversial, due to the majority of the populace in general not desiring to leave the EU, but not vot…

> 2. This is controversial, due to the majority of the populace in general not desiring to leave the EU, but not voting as such individually. Also an American, but from the outside I don't see how a majority desire can be so accurately determined beyond a vote. > Some portions of the UK [...] are strongly aganst this voting result. This I definitely see from the loudest. So strongly that the vote has been tarnished e…

Mathemarically, a slim victory with a large percent of the population abstaining does not indicate “majority desire”.

Democrasy doesn’t measure majority desire, it measures electioneering. Majority desire is definitely an aspect of elections, but it’s not the thing that gets measured.

There are better ways to accurately measure majority desire, and they are not one person/one vote systems.

What the system purports to give us is not accuracy, but fairness. It’s acknowledged that no matter what system you put in place, its ideals will be perverted. The best we hope for is that multiple parties all have access to those same perversions. So the difference between the U.S. and Russia is that both Bush and Gore had a right to sue the state of Florida. Of course the outcome doesn’t represent the will of the people in any meaningful way, but we take comfort in knowing that both candidates had the same games open to them.

In Russia, Putin is playing a wholly different legal game than everyone else. That’s anti-liberal, and anti-democratic.

Much hand wringing is happening in the U.S. today because the American President is mostly above the legal system, as its executor, with only the Senate holding him in check. And it’s not clear our current Senate is committed to the rule of law. We will see when Mueller’s report comes out. And perhaps some governors can also hold him to account.

Again, none of this bears any direct relation to the “will of the people” except that there is a method to the madness and any citizen can volunteer for any aspect of the game.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#200

I'll be the first to admit: I'm an American. I fundamentally do not understand Brexit. I understand the following timeline: 1. A largely disseminated, nation-wide vote occurs, bolstered by nationalist sentiment, that the EU is bad for the UK. This vote results in a conclusion that UK should leave the EU. 2. This is controversial, due to the majority of the populace in general not desiring to leave the EU, but not vot…

I expect a similar string of incongruities regarding the USA-Mexico wall. Don't end up building it and disappoint me, please.
Post reply on HN