Comment by IkmoIkmo | Hacker News Reader

Comment by IkmoIkmo | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> The EU is creating barriers to entry into it's economy for purposes of punishment (their words) - like the gym that makes you pay extra when you leave?

Of all countries on planet earth, it's frankly nothing less than comedy that we're seeing 'this eu realpolitik is unfair!' arguments from the UK. Anyway, no trade barriers, just one on real estate?

Anyway, frankly the UK today enjoys approximately the same circumstances pre and post vote. It's way too early to look at current metrics and say 'look, nothing going on or even an improvement' when the brexit vote has occurred, but the actual brexit is years away.

>And the weak pound + slow down in migration from the EU has caused wages to rise - which is awesome.

Also, I'm lacking some crucial context. Sure, wages are up, have you looked at inflation? In globalisation a weakening pound creates jobs and makes goods more expensive, can't have your cake and eat it too. Real wages are actually down in the UK, surprise.

> In the Alberta Oil Fields they want to increase migration for what they call 'labour input costs' - which is literally a different way of saying 'high wages'. In other words: 'wages are too high, we need more immigrants' - it's all rather obvious.

I've never really fully followed the reasoning. Let's not let anyone into our countries because hey, we want to keep the high-paying jobs for ourselves. Oh damn, jobs are moving overseas cause it's cheaper or dropping our wages to stay competitive, well let's bring back protectionism. Oh wait no, we believe in free trade.

Look I'm sympathetic to brexit voters, but I think one way or another, the west has to come to terms that the only way isn't up anymore, and that their relatively position of power will weaken no matter what policy path is taken. Whether you allow or disallow migrations, allow or disallow free trade, things have changed and they'll never be the same again. Literacy in India from British rule (1947) was 12%, now it's over 75%, and India is below the world average. That's close to a billion more literate competitive agents. No policy can simply isolate you from that. And that's just one metric from one country. The nationalist rhetoric isn't the solution, it's simple scapegoating.

> we're seeing 'this eu realpolitik is unfair!' arguments from the UK

No, you're not, if "the UK" is the government and London elite. Brexit voters are a demographic of their own, in a nation run by another demographic hostile to them.

> keep the high-paying jobs for ourselves

isn't the issue average wages vs top wage jobs? ie what the wage of unskilled labour is. Which demographic is saying "Oh damn.. well let's bring back.. Oh wait no.."? factory workers, or owners?

> Literacy in India

EU would require you prioritise a Pole over an Indian immigrant, it is protectionism at a European scope.

One question. If all the trade moves abroad how are they going to sell anything to the UK?

Rework your thinking with floating rate currencies.

"Of all countries on planet earth, it's frankly nothing less than comedy that we're seeing 'this eu realpolitik is unfair!' arguments from the UK. "

Nobody is claiming 'unfair' - we're pointing out that the EU is not this bullst idea of 'Europeans coming together in solidarity' it's just a selfish entity, mostly for the benefit of the elites.

And by the way - it's not 'realpolitik' - it's stupid-politik - because 'punishing' leavers may create some kind of barrier to others thinking about it - but in reality - it exposes the schizophrenia if the EU for what it is.

A 'strong' EU is what others want to join.

Only weak and inauthentic entities like the Soviet Union and the EU need to 'punish' people for daring to leave.

Can you think of other movements that punish people for leaving? China? Cuba? Soviets? North Korea?

The EU and UK should seek a 'good deal' with one another. The EU is afraid of falling apart and is seeking vengeance.

The EU is fundamentally broken and were it to have developed a degree of self awareness, would have remedied the issues and there would be no 'right wing movement' in the EU - it would not have had a chance to exist.

  "Whether you allow or disallow migrations, allow or disallow free trade, things have changed and they'll never be the same again. "

Nobody is denying this reality.

"disallow free trade"

The UK wants free trade with the EU, it is the EU which is denying the situation.

As far as migration - the UK accepts considerably more migrants only only from EU countries - but also from non EU countries than effectively any nation in the EU.

> we're pointing out that the EU is not this bullst idea of 'Europeans coming together in solidarity' it's just a selfish entity, mostly for the benefit of the elites.

But you do agree that's bullshit as well, don't you?

I mean, the EU's goals is to serve the collective best interests of all and every single member-state. Now you're seeing a nation that intentionally placed itself out of that privileged group, and you're complaining that their best interests aren't being considered by everyone else.

I mean, that's like taking up a spa membership to enjoy massages, then deciding to drop the service, and then complaining that the spa is a selfish entity that caters to the elites just because you expected to keep receiving massages after you got your wish of dropping your membership.

The analogy there is poor.

> I mean, that's like

No, it isn't. Spa membership doesn't dictate what you cannot do outside the spa. Spas do not collude other competing spas to exclude you from interacting with them.

That's where you get it wrong. The EU is an association. Every single member agreed to centralised policy stuff because that fits their needs and suits their best interests. One member decided to leave and thus forfeited the privileges available to their members. It's that simple.

First, you haven't responded to my points which addressed, specifically, your spa analogy.

Second, some privileges are real, and some manufactured to punish outsiders. Prioritization and restrictions on trading with non-EU is an example of this, which addresses the "hypocrisy of protectionism" point.

Finally, "because that fits their needs and suits their best interests" who's interest? Brexit voters? They got one vote premised on an EU promising the moon, and little control or feedback sibce then until the recent Brexit vote.

the EU's goals is to serve the collective best interests of all and every single member-state

That's clearly not what it's trying to do right now. For one the UK is still a member state and still paying its dues, but the EU is acting in an extremely hostile way. Unless you reflexively define the best interests of the EU Commission and related institutions as "the best interests of all and every single member state", it is certainly not the case.

Consider: The EU is setting things up such that in just over a year trucks will start to pile up at ports, costs will rise across Europe and the UK, many European firms will be cut off from the financing they receive from London, airplanes will be grounded, Irish politics will destabilise due to the introduction of a hard border and that's really just the beginning. None of this is in the interests of any person in any EU member state at all. And it can all be easily avoided.

Your spa analogy is very badly off by the way. Trade isn't something countries sell like a product itself, despite the EU's attempts to package it that way. Countries that strike free trade deals do not "buy" them, they negotiate and agree to them. Think about neighbours cooperating more than a consumer buying a product.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com