The Brits vote for freedom!

[Dajjal]

Like I said, without at least a degree in economics I do not consider myself , or anyone else qualified to make a correct decision about the EU. So I listened to the brainy people, like the prime minister, and the heads of industry, and the president of the bank of England, and followed their lead.

 

[forkup]

All the brainy people like David Cameron and the leader of the labour party, and the head of the bank of England, and leading business people wanted to stay. Because they knew leaving would be an economic disaster. All the leaders of the European union wanted Britain to stay.
But the leave campaign appealed to patriotism and flag waving, and the fear of Immigrants to persuade people who do not understand the economy to leave.

And your point is what, exactly? That the PEOPLE of a country have no right to speak up?

Oh, that's right...you're in England. Here's a hint for you: that attitude got your asses kicked in America.

And again - when did "patriotism" and "flag waving" become a bad thing?

You liberals in England are as stupid and as dangerous as the liberals in America are.

I'll explain something to you . There is a reason

As far as I am concerned nobody without a degree in economics was qualified to vote on the issue. I do not have such a degree and do not understand all the implications of leaving Europe So I followed the lead of people who do have such education. Pretty well all the people who do have such knowledge supported remaining in the EU. Unlike many people I do not think the educated class were trying to keep us down, they were trying to protect the economy.
Now it is busted, and we are probably going to face a down turn in the economy.

Your first two sentences are all I ever need to know about you, politically speaking. Let me refresh your memory, just in case:

As far as I am concerned nobody without a degree in economics was qualified to vote on the issue. I do not have such a degree and do not understand all the implications of leaving Europe So I followed the lead of people who do have such education.

Hypocrisy: "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform" From a quick Google search, first entry.

Can you explain to me what trying to make an educated decision by following those people who actually are educated has to do with hypocrisy? Dajjal didn't mention morally superior those were the words of someone else.

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

That's a explanation but not an explanation why Dajjal is a hypocrite. If you throw around labels make sure they fit. As to the post itself. Democracy is all about following, if you say proud tea party member, then you implying you FOLLOW that party line. Direct democracy hasn't been practised since Ancient Greece. Nore should it be, because the issues in modern multi million people countries are often so complex that it's impossible to judge te scope of any decision unless you are elected to find out that scope. And even then alot of mistakes are made.

I called him a follower. And no, democracy is NOT about "following". It's about "choosing" - based on YOUR vote, and YOUR research on a referendum, or candidate. I have never followed a "party line" in my life. I make my own decisions. Fortunately for me, the only liberal democrat candidate I have ever supported was JFK. Unfortunately, the information on that asshole wasn't available until AFTER his death, or he would never have gotten my vote,

No he isn't a follower by your definition either. He gets the information available and tries to make an informed decision. Explain how that is different from what you do? Economist wheren't in his voting booth when he CHOOSE. And you're right you didn't call him a hypocrite I appoligise.

 

[RandallFlagg]

All the brainy people like David Cameron and the leader of the labour party, and the head of the bank of England, and leading business people wanted to stay. Because they knew leaving would be an economic disaster. All the leaders of the European union wanted Britain to stay.
But the leave campaign appealed to patriotism and flag waving, and the fear of Immigrants to persuade people who do not understand the economy to leave.

And your point is what, exactly? That the PEOPLE of a country have no right to speak up?

Oh, that's right...you're in England. Here's a hint for you: that attitude got your asses kicked in America.

And again - when did "patriotism" and "flag waving" become a bad thing?

You liberals in England are as stupid and as dangerous as the liberals in America are.

I'll explain something to you . There is a reason

As far as I am concerned nobody without a degree in economics was qualified to vote on the issue. I do not have such a degree and do not understand all the implications of leaving Europe So I followed the lead of people who do have such education. Pretty well all the people who do have such knowledge supported remaining in the EU. Unlike many people I do not think the educated class were trying to keep us down, they were trying to protect the economy.
Now it is busted, and we are probably going to face a down turn in the economy.

Your first two sentences are all I ever need to know about you, politically speaking. Let me refresh your memory, just in case:

As far as I am concerned nobody without a degree in economics was qualified to vote on the issue. I do not have such a degree and do not understand all the implications of leaving Europe So I followed the lead of people who do have such education.

Hypocrisy: "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform" From a quick Google search, first entry.

Can you explain to me what trying to make an educated decision by following those people who actually are educated has to do with hypocrisy? Dajjal didn't mention morally superior those were the words of someone else.

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

I trusted David Cameron, and voted for him at the last election. I do know who I will vote for at the next election if that clown Boris gets to be prime minster. I would not trust him with my piggy bank, let alone the economy.

Why did you trust David Cameron? Did he do something for you? Or promise to? We generally vote for candidates whom we believe will lean in our direction, do we not?

So, what did you get for your vote? No jobs? The destruction of English society? The influx of outlanders? Terrorism? Because that's what you got with Cameron.

Same as with Obama.

Remember - the "people" get the government they deserve.

 

[RandallFlagg]

And your point is what, exactly? That the PEOPLE of a country have no right to speak up?

Oh, that's right...you're in England. Here's a hint for you: that attitude got your asses kicked in America.

And again - when did "patriotism" and "flag waving" become a bad thing?

You liberals in England are as stupid and as dangerous as the liberals in America are.

I'll explain something to you . There is a reason

Your first two sentences are all I ever need to know about you, politically speaking. Let me refresh your memory, just in case:
Hypocrisy: "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform" From a quick Google search, first entry.

Can you explain to me what trying to make an educated decision by following those people who actually are educated has to do with hypocrisy? Dajjal didn't mention morally superior those were the words of someone else.

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

That's a explanation but not an explanation why Dajjal is a hypocrite. If you throw around labels make sure they fit. As to the post itself. Democracy is all about following, if you say proud tea party member, then you implying you FOLLOW that party line. Direct democracy hasn't been practised since Ancient Greece. Nore should it be, because the issues in modern multi million people countries are often so complex that it's impossible to judge te scope of any decision unless you are elected to find out that scope. And even then alot of mistakes are made.

I called him a follower. And no, democracy is NOT about "following". It's about "choosing" - based on YOUR vote, and YOUR research on a referendum, or candidate. I have never followed a "party line" in my life. I make my own decisions. Fortunately for me, the only liberal democrat candidate I have ever supported was JFK. Unfortunately, the information on that asshole wasn't available until AFTER his death, or he would never have gotten my vote,

No he isn't a follower by your definition either. He gets the information available and tries to make an informed decision. Explain how that is different from what you do? Economist wheren't in his voting booth when he CHOOSE. And you're right you didn't call him a hypocrite I appoligise.

However, don't you see? Propaganda is propaganda, regardless of the form it takes. Being able to discern the difference is what makes us "informed". If I listened to the left in this country (all the professors, the pseudo-intellectuals) without checking their credibility, their "sources", I would always vote democrat.

Fortunately, I don't fall into lockstep with their minions.

I'm a working class stiff with a College degree. I know what it's like to work 40-60 hours a week. That's why I don't buy into liberal crap.

 

[forkup]

All the brainy people like David Cameron and the leader of the labour party, and the head of the bank of England, and leading business people wanted to stay. Because they knew leaving would be an economic disaster. All the leaders of the European union wanted Britain to stay.
But the leave campaign appealed to patriotism and flag waving, and the fear of Immigrants to persuade people who do not understand the economy to leave.

And your point is what, exactly? That the PEOPLE of a country have no right to speak up?

Oh, that's right...you're in England. Here's a hint for you: that attitude got your asses kicked in America.

And again - when did "patriotism" and "flag waving" become a bad thing?

You liberals in England are as stupid and as dangerous as the liberals in America are.

I'll explain something to you . There is a reason

As far as I am concerned nobody without a degree in economics was qualified to vote on the issue. I do not have such a degree and do not understand all the implications of leaving Europe So I followed the lead of people who do have such education. Pretty well all the people who do have such knowledge supported remaining in the EU. Unlike many people I do not think the educated class were trying to keep us down, they were trying to protect the economy.
Now it is busted, and we are probably going to face a down turn in the economy.

Your first two sentences are all I ever need to know about you, politically speaking. Let me refresh your memory, just in case:

As far as I am concerned nobody without a degree in economics was qualified to vote on the issue. I do not have such a degree and do not understand all the implications of leaving Europe So I followed the lead of people who do have such education.

Hypocrisy: "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform" From a quick Google search, first entry.

Can you explain to me what trying to make an educated decision by following those people who actually are educated has to do with hypocrisy? Dajjal didn't mention morally superior those were the words of someone else.

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

I trusted David Cameron, and voted for him at the last election. I do know who I will vote for at the next election if that clown Boris gets to be prime minster. I would not trust him with my piggy bank, let alone the economy.

Why did you trust David Cameron? Did he do something for you? Or promise to? We generally vote for candidates whom we believe will lean in our direction, do we not?

So, what did you get for your vote? No jobs? The destruction of English society? The influx of outlanders? Terrorism? Because that's what you got with Cameron.

Same as with Obama.

Remember - the "people" get the government they deserve.

What did Trump ever do for you? By your own admission you don't trust him either.Besides blurting out anything and everything that pops up in is head, why do you feel he's qualified to make decisions for you? Not having a filter I promise you, will hurt the U.S when dealing with foreign countries friendly or otherwise.

 

[forkup]

I'll explain something to you . There is a reason
Can you explain to me what trying to make an educated decision by following those people who actually are educated has to do with hypocrisy? Dajjal didn't mention morally superior those were the words of someone else.

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

That's a explanation but not an explanation why Dajjal is a hypocrite. If you throw around labels make sure they fit. As to the post itself. Democracy is all about following, if you say proud tea party member, then you implying you FOLLOW that party line. Direct democracy hasn't been practised since Ancient Greece. Nore should it be, because the issues in modern multi million people countries are often so complex that it's impossible to judge te scope of any decision unless you are elected to find out that scope. And even then alot of mistakes are made.

I called him a follower. And no, democracy is NOT about "following". It's about "choosing" - based on YOUR vote, and YOUR research on a referendum, or candidate. I have never followed a "party line" in my life. I make my own decisions. Fortunately for me, the only liberal democrat candidate I have ever supported was JFK. Unfortunately, the information on that asshole wasn't available until AFTER his death, or he would never have gotten my vote,

No he isn't a follower by your definition either. He gets the information available and tries to make an informed decision. Explain how that is different from what you do? Economist wheren't in his voting booth when he CHOOSE. And you're right you didn't call him a hypocrite I appoligise.

However, don't you see? Propaganda is propaganda, regardless of the form it takes. Being able to discern the difference is what makes us "informed". If I listened to the left in this country (all the professors, the pseudo-intellectuals) without checking their credibility, their "sources", I would always vote democrat.

Fortunately, I don't fall into lockstep with their minions.

I'm a working class stiff with a College degree. I know what it's like to work 40-60 hours a week. That's why I don't buy into liberal crap.

Look if you don't feel you are indoctrinated yourself fine. But I'm a working stiff myself, I live in Europe and all the things I suspect you fear, are in my country. So if you want to be informed without putting yourself up for propaganda you can ask, altough I fear you won't. And before you mention it. I have an American wife so I do have more then passing knowledge about how the U.S is?

 

[RandallFlagg]

And your point is what, exactly? That the PEOPLE of a country have no right to speak up?

Oh, that's right...you're in England. Here's a hint for you: that attitude got your asses kicked in America.

And again - when did "patriotism" and "flag waving" become a bad thing?

You liberals in England are as stupid and as dangerous as the liberals in America are.

I'll explain something to you . There is a reason

Your first two sentences are all I ever need to know about you, politically speaking. Let me refresh your memory, just in case:
Hypocrisy: "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform" From a quick Google search, first entry.

Can you explain to me what trying to make an educated decision by following those people who actually are educated has to do with hypocrisy? Dajjal didn't mention morally superior those were the words of someone else.

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

I trusted David Cameron, and voted for him at the last election. I do know who I will vote for at the next election if that clown Boris gets to be prime minster. I would not trust him with my piggy bank, let alone the economy.

Why did you trust David Cameron? Did he do something for you? Or promise to? We generally vote for candidates whom we believe will lean in our direction, do we not?

So, what did you get for your vote? No jobs? The destruction of English society? The influx of outlanders? Terrorism? Because that's what you got with Cameron.

Same as with Obama.

Remember - the "people" get the government they deserve.

What did Trump ever do for you? By your own admission you don't trust him either.Besides blurting out anything and everything that pops up in is head, why do you feel he's qualified to make decisions for you? Not having a filter I promise you, will hurt the U.S when dealing with foreign countries friendly or otherwise.

Well hell, using that logic (and that logic only) what did Obama give you? Terrorists attacks (or workplace violence), apology tours to the world, the slowest economic recovery the world has ever seen, obamacare, 20 trillion dollars in debt, nearly 50 million on food stamps and welfare, 98 million people who have given up even LOOKING for work, illegals flooding across our border - taking what few precious jobs that are left.


Gee. We sound just like England. And you wonder why I would cast a ballot for ANYONE other than a damned politician.......

 

[RandallFlagg]

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

That's a explanation but not an explanation why Dajjal is a hypocrite. If you throw around labels make sure they fit. As to the post itself. Democracy is all about following, if you say proud tea party member, then you implying you FOLLOW that party line. Direct democracy hasn't been practised since Ancient Greece. Nore should it be, because the issues in modern multi million people countries are often so complex that it's impossible to judge te scope of any decision unless you are elected to find out that scope. And even then alot of mistakes are made.

I called him a follower. And no, democracy is NOT about "following". It's about "choosing" - based on YOUR vote, and YOUR research on a referendum, or candidate. I have never followed a "party line" in my life. I make my own decisions. Fortunately for me, the only liberal democrat candidate I have ever supported was JFK. Unfortunately, the information on that asshole wasn't available until AFTER his death, or he would never have gotten my vote,

No he isn't a follower by your definition either. He gets the information available and tries to make an informed decision. Explain how that is different from what you do? Economist wheren't in his voting booth when he CHOOSE. And you're right you didn't call him a hypocrite I appoligise.

However, don't you see? Propaganda is propaganda, regardless of the form it takes. Being able to discern the difference is what makes us "informed". If I listened to the left in this country (all the professors, the pseudo-intellectuals) without checking their credibility, their "sources", I would always vote democrat.

Fortunately, I don't fall into lockstep with their minions.

I'm a working class stiff with a College degree. I know what it's like to work 40-60 hours a week. That's why I don't buy into liberal crap.

Look if you don't feel you are indoctrinated yourself fine. But I'm a working stiff myself, I live in Europe and all the things I suspect you fear, are in my country. So if you want to be informed without putting yourself up for propaganda you can ask, altough I fear you won't. And before you mention it. I have an American wife so I do have more then passing knowledge about how the U.S is?

Like I said - people get the government they deserve. Remember that.

 

[forkup]

I'll explain something to you . There is a reason
Can you explain to me what trying to make an educated decision by following those people who actually are educated has to do with hypocrisy? Dajjal didn't mention morally superior those were the words of someone else.

I'd be glad to. FOLLOWING Is not deciding for yourself. It's allowing those, who stand to achieve financial restitution over and above their investment, to make YOUR decision for you.

It's generall called "liberalism" - giving up your free will to those you believe are "smarter" than you. Liberals LOVE to tell you how "smart" they are.

This guy, chose to FOLLOW. Typical liberal lemming.

I trusted David Cameron, and voted for him at the last election. I do know who I will vote for at the next election if that clown Boris gets to be prime minster. I would not trust him with my piggy bank, let alone the economy.

Why did you trust David Cameron? Did he do something for you? Or promise to? We generally vote for candidates whom we believe will lean in our direction, do we not?

So, what did you get for your vote? No jobs? The destruction of English society? The influx of outlanders? Terrorism? Because that's what you got with Cameron.

Same as with Obama.

Remember - the "people" get the government they deserve.

What did Trump ever do for you? By your own admission you don't trust him either.Besides blurting out anything and everything that pops up in is head, why do you feel he's qualified to make decisions for you? Not having a filter I promise you, will hurt the U.S when dealing with foreign countries friendly or otherwise.

Well hell, using that logic (and that logic only) what did Obama give you? Terrorists attacks (or workplace violence), apology tours to the world, the slowest economic recovery the world has ever seen, obamacare, 20 trillion dollars in debt, nearly 50 million on food stamps and welfare, 98 million people who have given up even LOOKING for work, illegals flooding across our border - taking what few precious jobs that are left.


Gee. We sound just like England. And you wonder why I would cast a ballot for ANYONE other than a damned politician.......

You used that argument first I just reversed it.

 

[Bleipriester]

The pound has already gone down 10% against the dollar, and there are going to be many more repercussions for the economy.
I voted stay but was defeated by flag waving simpletons.

I heard global warming is going to drown you now. It tried to interrupt polling and yet it failed. Now, the sea level will rise and make you impossible as you voted to disconnect yourself from the continent. At least, in London´s upper floors there will be water available again as it cannot seep through the holey culverts anymore. Good luck out there, we have no more place for refugees, you know.

 

[Flopper]

I used to be a big free trade advocate, but I have come to realize that free trade means that jobs will inevitably go to nations that do not have minimum wage laws, safety standards, worker's compensation, retirement plans, or the other protections that American workers have come to expect. The wealthy and corporations will do what is profitable and seek the cheapest labor they can to produce a product, which means shipping jobs overseas, or hiring illegal workers and paying them under the table.

Say what you want about Trump, but he has our "trade deals" figured out. The only ones that have EVER benefited from our trade deals are the countries we deal with - and the filthy rich assholes who set the deals up.

They cost us thousands of jobs and billions of dollars (if not trillions).

Trump either does not understand the economics of international trade or he's lying. More likely it's the latter.

 

[Flopper]

Personally, I'm glad to see the people of Britain throwing off their shackles.

if the Scots don't like it, let them leave. They will find it hard to survive without the English taxpayer funding their large number of welfare layabouts.

Scotland believes it will be disastrous to their economic interest to leave the EU. This is why they voted against it and will seek an independence referendum.

Britain has depended on trade agreements negotiated by the EC and EU for over 40 years. In two years, Britain will loose those agreements which can mean disastrous interruptions in trade. Britain will have two options. It can either negotiate new agreements over the next 2 years which would be almost impossible since it can take a decade or longer because of the many nations involved or bargain with the EU to allow Britain's continued inclusion in these agreements. The problem here is Brussels has made it clear that they will deal harshly with Britain if they exit the EU in order to keep other countries, namely France from following in Britain's footsteps.

It's ironic that the working class who have generally supported Bexit will bear the blunt of the economic consequences.

Jesus Christ - do you NOT read? They just had an independence reform vote two years ago and it failed miserably.

Two years ago, Scotland was not being dragged out of the EU. It voted to stay in the EU by a huge margin 62 to 38.

 

[Flopper]

Like I said, without at least a degree in economics I do not consider myself , or anyone else qualified to make a correct decision about the EU. So I listened to the brainy people, like the prime minister, and the heads of industry, and the president of the bank of England, and followed their lead.

Like Trump supporters, supporters of Bexit do not trust the establishment which includes economists, heads of state, and leaders in industry. They want a simple solution, build a wall around the country to keep all the bad stuff out. Of course this keeps the good stuff out that they depend on, however they don't understand this.

 

[Decus]

Personally, I'm glad to see the people of Britain throwing off their shackles.

if the Scots don't like it, let them leave. They will find it hard to survive without the English taxpayer funding their large number of welfare layabouts.

Scotland believes it will be disastrous to their economic interest to leave the EU. This is why they voted against it and will seek an independence referendum.

Britain has depended on trade agreements negotiated by the EC and EU for over 40 years. In two years, Britain will loose those agreements which can mean disastrous interruptions in trade. Britain will have two options. It can either negotiate new agreements over the next 2 years which would be almost impossible since it can take a decade or longer because of the many nations involved or bargain with the EU to allow Britain's continued inclusion in these agreements. The problem here is Brussels has made it clear that they will deal harshly with Britain if they exit the EU in order to keep other countries, namely France from following in Britain's footsteps.

It's ironic that the working class who have generally supported Bexit will bear the blunt of the economic consequences.

Jesus Christ - do you NOT read? They just had an independence reform vote two years ago and it failed miserably.

2 years ago the Scots were told by the English that if they voted for independence they wouldn't be able to stay in the EU - wanting to stay in EU the Scots voted against their independence.

They will vote for their independence now because...again....they want to stay in the EU.

"EU membership was one of the key issues in 2014, with those campaigning for Scotland to stick with the United Kingdom arguing that an independent Scotland would not be able to remain a member of the bloc."

New Scotland independence referendum 'highly likely': Sturgeon

.

 

[HenryBHough]

Once The UK is out, Scotland is out. But I'm sure The EU will welcome their application for membership and give them a special place in line. Respecting, of course, rules, regulations and principles. That should be only about 5 applicants behind Turkey - the nation that has been in the queue for, what, three? or is that four? years.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Like I said, without at least a degree in economics I do not consider myself , or anyone else qualified to make a correct decision about the EU. So I listened to the brainy people, like the prime minister, and the heads of industry, and the president of the bank of England, and followed their lead.

Like Trump supporters, supporters of Bexit do not trust the establishment which includes economists, heads of state, and leaders in industry. They want a simple solution, build a wall around the country to keep all the bad stuff out. Of course this keeps the good stuff out that they depend on, however they don't understand this.

Bub, with all respect, we have listened to your side for far too many years with no results (except, of course for the rich). It's sort of like your cries of "Climate Chage - we're all going to die". These "experts" swore that the world would be over by 2010.

We're still here. Summers are still hot and Winters are still cold.

The time for listening to these "experts" is gone.

Believe it or not, there ARE simple solutions. Make America your FIRST priority, rather than the world and "globalism". Before any law is passed, ALWAYS ask the question: "is it good for the US" and bullshit hem hawing and all the liberal spin must be stopped.

Concentrate on putting people to work. Rebuild our infrastructure and for God's sake - stop worrying about what the rest of the damned world thinks about us. I don't give two hoots in hell what anyone thinks about us - and as an American, neither should you.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Like I said, without at least a degree in economics I do not consider myself , or anyone else qualified to make a correct decision about the EU. So I listened to the brainy people, like the prime minister, and the heads of industry, and the president of the bank of England, and followed their lead.

Like Trump supporters, supporters of Bexit do not trust the establishment which includes economists, heads of state, and leaders in industry. They want a simple solution, build a wall around the country to keep all the bad stuff out. Of course this keeps the good stuff out that they depend on, however they don't understand this.

The other thing is the inevitable. Get ready for the drubbing that your side is going to get in November. It's coming. If England doesn't convince you, you are too far gone to help.

 

[Flopper]

Personally, I'm glad to see the people of Britain throwing off their shackles.

if the Scots don't like it, let them leave. They will find it hard to survive without the English taxpayer funding their large number of welfare layabouts.

Scotland believes it will be disastrous to their economic interest to leave the EU. This is why they voted against it and will seek an independence referendum.

Britain has depended on trade agreements negotiated by the EC and EU for over 40 years. In two years, Britain will loose those agreements which can mean disastrous interruptions in trade. Britain will have two options. It can either negotiate new agreements over the next 2 years which would be almost impossible since it can take a decade or longer because of the many nations involved or bargain with the EU to allow Britain's continued inclusion in these agreements. The problem here is Brussels has made it clear that they will deal harshly with Britain if they exit the EU in order to keep other countries, namely France from following in Britain's footsteps.

It's ironic that the working class who have generally supported Bexit will bear the blunt of the economic consequences.

Jesus Christ - do you NOT read? They just had an independence reform vote two years ago and it failed miserably.

2 years ago the Scots were told by the English that if they voted for independence they wouldn't be able to stay in the EU - wanting to stay in EU the Scots voted against their independence.

They will vote for their independence now because...again....they want to stay in the EU.

"EU membership was one of the key issues in 2014, with those campaigning for Scotland to stick with the United Kingdom arguing that an independent Scotland would not be able to remain a member of the bloc."

New Scotland independence referendum 'highly likely': Sturgeon

.

An Independence Referendum would not be binding just as the Bexit referendum is not binding. Parliament will have to approve both. In the case of the Independence Referendum, both the Scottish and British parliament would have to approve. Although it would certainly cost the seat of some members that would vote against a referendum approved by the people, it certainly could happen. For Britain to lose Scotland and all the EU trade treaties would be an economic disaster. Great Britain would become Little Britain.

 

[Vandalshandle]

"These "experts" swore that the world would be over by 2010."

I must have been off line that day.

 

[montelatici]

"It's now much more plausible that other member states would agree to amend the Treaties to transfer the UK's membership in the EU (ed.) to Scotland."

Reality Check: Could Scotland inherit the UK's EU membership? - BBC News