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

Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#651

Post by justaguyhere »

yholio wrote: post #41

The Brexit promise is something nobody can deliver on. It was a lie, you cannot force the EU to accept an unfavorable trade deal. If only for the reason that it would set an exceptionally bad precedent and everybody would want their own deal, to pick and choose the parts of EU membership that are favorable to them, leading the EU to implode. Somebody needs to own up to that lie and accept that a "no deal" outcome, wh…

This should be a lesson for all voters across the world - think for a minute before voting. At least try to understand what you're voting on. We can blame all we want on the media, politicians etc etc, but in the end, we can't deny Brexit is the result of a properly, democratically conducted election - voters need to take at least some responsibility. No amount of "voters' remorse" is going to help now.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#652

Post by jacknews »

I see the headlines are trumpeting how sterling rose (0.05% !!) after the results (hinting that the result is good news), but this looks like a clear case of short-covering to me - short speculation earlier in the day (possibly anticipating a decline if the vote passed), covered when the actual results came out.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#653

Post by jpster »

philwelch wrote: post #476
hardlianotion wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those negotiations were not made on the basis of threatening to leave the EU. (edited for clarity)

British Euroskepticism has been a political force for decades and the risk of a Brexit has always been an implicit source of negotiating leverage for the UK.

Yes, but now the UK is out over its skis. It has much less leverage now than its MPs seem to realize. The clock is ticking — they are headed for a hard Brexit in 10 weeks and everyone knows they’ve not planned for it.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#654

Post by jpster »

notahacker wrote: post #285
OscarCunningham wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's hard to understand why Germany or France, who stand to gain from excluding the powerful UK service sector from the EU financial markets No they don't. Germany and France contain consumers of services as well as providers.

Consumers of services for the most part couldn't care less whether the back end of their trades is carried out by the London, Paris or Frankfurt offices of HSBC or Deutsche Bank. On the other hand, it's a nice little boost to French or German politicians to be able to talk about financial services industry growth and have a bit more tax revenue to play with.

I concur. One only need look within the number of companies who have opted to move offices to the Continent.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#655

Post by sxg »

chii wrote: post #623
jandrese wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that literally nobody wants May's job right now. Given the shit sandwich she has to work with she's doing the best she can, but the best they can do is make a terrible situation slightly less terrible.

I don't get why she can't just rescind article 50, and get rid of brexit altogether. The leave voters will just complain, but it avoids all the chaos and cost associated with leaving, when there's no clear benefits.

I believe she can, and that is technically an option. The problem is that this could destabilize the country. Citizens voted and asked for a Brexit to happen. The government is trying to honor that request as it is a democratic country. If it just decided to ignore the vote and cancel any plans for Brexit, the British government would do irreparable harm to the idea of democracy in Britain.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#656

Post by sbmassey »

lizknope wrote: post #459
jkmcf wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Also an American, but from the outside I don't see how a majority desire can be so objectively determined beyond a vote. My personal opinion is "majority" wins isn't necessarily a proper majority. Given how our Congress votes party line on most things, and the ratio is more or less 50:50 Dm to Rep, a 66% majority seems minimal for passing any law unblemished with party bias. With 72% of registered UK voter turnout,…

In the United States we require super majorities to amend the Constitution. 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the state legislatures. Something as important as Brexit should require more than 50.1% to pass. But it was actually non-binding anyway so the government could just ignore it.

If that applied, then major changes to the structure of the European Union such as Maastricht or the Lisbon treaty should also have required the >50% vote.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#657

Post by mr_toad »

pron wrote: post #591
yholio wrote: post #41

The Brexit promise is something nobody can deliver on. It was a lie, you cannot force the EU to accept an unfavorable trade deal. If only for the reason that it would set an exceptionally bad precedent and everybody would want their own deal, to pick and choose the parts of EU membership that are favorable to them, leading the EU to implode. Somebody needs to own up to that lie and accept that a "no deal" outcome, wh…

> a "no deal" outcome, which is clearly bad, is still the best thing brexiters can actually deliver I don't see the logic here. The deal (let's call it D), is clearly worse than staying in the EU (let's call that option E). From that relation D < E it does not follow that no-deal (N) is better than a deal, i.e. D < N. It may well be that N < D < E. So I don't see how no-deal is the "best the brexiteers can delliver."

Because they can’t agree on D. So they end up with N.

Worse, some of them seem to be deluded into thinking they can get some sort of D+ or D* or D’, even though the EU has made it clear they will not renegotiate.

I believe one MP likened that scenario to the likelihood of Scarlet Johansen riding in on a unicorn.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#658

Post by chrischen »

sxg wrote: post #655
chii wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get why she can't just rescind article 50, and get rid of brexit altogether. The leave voters will just complain, but it avoids all the chaos and cost associated with leaving, when there's no clear benefits.

I believe she can, and that is technically an option. The problem is that this could destabilize the country. Citizens voted and asked for a Brexit to happen. The government is trying to honor that request as it is a democratic country. If it just decided to ignore the vote and cancel any plans for Brexit, the British government would do irreparable harm to the idea of democracy in Britain.

They could perhaps vote again.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#659

Post by CamelCaseName »

siquick wrote: post #547
mattlondon wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

16 year olds can get married, join the military, work fulltime and pay income tax. Why shouldn't they also be allowed to vote?

Why should they pay tax without representation?

What proportion of 16 year olds are paying tax? My guess is How many 16 year olds work enough to make above the minimum exemption? (£11,580) My guess is very few. Minimum wage for 16-18 year olds is £4.20/hr, but they'd need to make above £5.56 (11580/40/52) to have to pay income tax as they cannot work more than 40h a week.

I also assume the vast majority have no/negligible assets to earn income off.

So the only tax they would be paying is VAT, which everyone, including tourists, pay and shouldn't confer the right to representation.

Re: Brexit Deal Fails in Parliament

#660

Post by twblalock »

The problem with referendums is you can't have just one.

The losers will always want another referendum, and they will always be able to point out problems with the previous one and/or argue that significant things have changed since it was held. The results of the previous referendum will never seem legitimate unless it was passed by an overwhelming majority of voters.

Just don't have referendums. They open a wound that will never heal.

Post reply on HN