Hacker News Reader

Comment by WhirlingBirdz | Hacker News Reader

Brexit is bad for the UK. We can all agree on that?

But it's also a TRAGEDY for the EU. They've lost one of their principal contributors, as well as prestige and status. This is generally not talked about.

The EU are negotiating HARD. Why? Because they are in a position of weakness. If they were in a position of strength then they would let the UK go easily.

Everyone knows this.

The complications are that the UK political establishment and business community don't actually want to leave the EU. Hence the desperate attempt by UK negotiators to keep as much of the old system as possible, to the anger of the proletariat.

View on HN

This is not true. Brexit is good for the UK and the EU. Now finally clowns like Farage will be exposed for their 'rebel for good' fake ideals. The British public will either accept it's own sentence following decades of 'the bad bureaucrats in Brussels' fake news or come to realize that cooperation at both economical and political on large scale is the way to move forward.

Brexit isn't about Farage. As you say, he is a clown, a distraction, and a totem for the anger of middle-class metropolitans.

Brexit was about the working-class of the UK who voted to leave the EU, and their reasons for doing that.

Again, not true. Voting percentage was - 1. Majority leave in poor areas 2. Majority leave in the older population. 3. London voted remain. Reasons? We all know the reasons, and I'm not even going to go into the superiority complex that these people have.

> "We all know the reasons"

Do we? Are you getting your information from the mainstream media? Are you aware of how much they distort the facts to suit their own narratives? Why do you think Brexit would be any different?

Does it matter? Britain wants to leave the EU. I know what the EU represents and what it doesn't. That's enough.

You're saying this as if there's an unified consensus within Britain. A bit more than half of Britain wanted to leave, and a bit less than half of Britain wanted to remain. They'll still honor the democratic process and do what the general population chose to do, but it's an overstatement to say that Britain wants to leave when it's rather that Britain was highly undecided and has(had?) a mild preference towards leaving.

It matters. Immigrants have been made to feel unwelcome from the way the press have handled their coverage. Their coverage has also stifled debate by unnecessarily polarising people against each other. The damage they've done and continue to do to the UK, both during Brexit and in other matters, is pretty clear.

Aside from that, what does the EU mean to you?

It's bad for german power in the EU, but i don't think it's a tragedy for the EU. The UK paid more to the eu than what he got back, that's a fact, but the right to trade European currency is what made the City this powerfull (compared to Paris, Franckfurt, Zurich). I'm pretty sure the taxes on income from displaced trading centers will make up for the "loss" for EU budget.

Also, the skill loss for EU is almost nil, while UK will lose europeen skilled workers (and those contribute a lot to GPD).

> it's also a TRAGEDY for the EU.

Lol, this is something only the British press peddles.

Across Europe the overwhelming feeling, for people without UK interests, is of relief. Finally they got rid of a recalcitrant member, the main opponent to "ever closer union" projects, the leader of the free-trade gang that is now in ruins (also embodied in the attacks on Ireland and Luxembourg tax affairs, the harshness on Poland and Hungary and so on), an annoying magnet to EU money flows and institutions, one of the main conduit for tax evasion across the Union... And all this without having to concede on anything, because Brits just did it all themselves!

The net difference in contributions to the EU budget is minor, even without an agreement it would be easily absorbed. The insistence on the principle of paying for the agreed budget was just because they could. In fact, haggling on that was much shorter than on things like ECJ role and Irish border, which are not really settled yet. Nobody really cared about the money.

> This is generally not talked about

Guess why? Because it's not really the case.

I'm not in the UK or EU, so I don't know what the mood is or have opinions about how the vote was conducted. But most economists I've read are not bullish on the EU doing better after Brexit, and it seems like "leave" parties have been coming to power over the past year.

Is that view so incorrect?

No its not, UK leave reduce EU negociating power, and isn't good overall. On the other hand, EU does not lose a lot of specialized workers with UK leave, so it will have little impact on industries (maybe in biotech and in finance). A German leave, on the other hand, would destroy EU economy.

Grandparent is right however, in France, most people see that as a good thing (i don't).

Of course, UK leaving EU is a negative factor for EU economics. But it's not a huge factor, and for common people (e.g. except businessmen in certain industries) it will mean less impact than all kinds of random local issues.

Also, UK leaving EU is nearly a certainty now and all the discussions are between the different kinds of "deal" or "no deal" after UK leaves - and the difference between these deals is highly important for UK voters but not particularly meaningful for most EU voters (again, except some with a particular interest e.g. expat workers living in UK).

The EU doesn't _need_ the UK, but the UK very much needs the EU and it'll have to abide by the same regulations they would as members if they want to trade with anyone who currently trades with the EU anyway. You'll be getting the same regulations without any of the benefits of membership.

Brexit is bad for the UK in the short term, but if the EU continues to destabilize and collapse, they could do far better.

EU sells the single market at the cost of sovereignty, UK decided to go shop around.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com