Quick poll on the UK's decision to leave the EU


Remain 48% Leave 52%  

253 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you support the decision for the UK to leave the European Union?

    • Yes
      93
    • No
      134


Recommended Posts

Obviously I am from the US and many people here will disregard my opinion because of my views however:

 

If I were there I would vote to leave because:

England was THE world superpower for a very very long time. They as a country will outlast the EU as well as the UK. England will withstand the sands of time, this is one such move for it to survive (or her?).

 

The EU was meant to compete with the US as well as perform other functions. It seems that a foreign government that doesn't represent all citizens poses a problem. With the mass immigration of refugees who do cause lots of problems, it was only a matter of time.

 

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.

6 hours ago, SpeedyTheSnail said:

England was THE world superpower for a very very long time. They as a country will outlast the EU as well as the UK. England will withstand the sands of time, this is one such move for it to survive (or her?).

 

Living in the past is no way to secure a decent future.

 

First off, England isn't what we're talking about here. The whole "Leave" vote was voted on as the United (lol) Kingdom, not just England. It's been a very, very long time since England itself was the super power you speak of. IMHO The UK on it's own does nothing but fester in it's own waste, in fact, the only reason England was ever great was because of its navy, and it's a long time now since sailing over to another country and sticking a flag in it declared you the owner, we simply can not do that in modern times and we have to move on.

 

England as a part of the UK, GREAT Britain, as part of the EU, enjoying open trade, borderless passage and working rights and a centralised area to administer certain regulations, is in a much stronger position than a UK facing total breakup, in financial ruin.

 

Let's put it this way, if Michigan broke away from the States and decided to be self governing but had to pay to trade with the US, create and support its own currency and locked down it's border to workers from other states, how long to you envisage it lasting?

 

That being said, yes, England will stand the test of time but is it better to just survive or is it better to flourish?

1 hour ago, MikeChipshop said:

 

Living in the past is no way to secure a decent future.

And yet MANY people use our past in argument to secure things. Second world war is used a lot in the EU, to represent how things have changed for the better, but anyone that questions them is branded a racist nazi who wants to go back to the second world war era. This means we ended up with an EU dictatorship and is one of the mason reasons people voted to leave, which I totally understand.

 

However I don't think they realise the reality that we will still trade with the EU, we will still have immigrants and refugees we will simply loose any power we previously had to influence trade decisions and laws in the EU itself which may or may not have been a benefit to us.

23 hours ago, Rippleman said:

I am not from Europe so only speaking as an outsider. To me, the EU is an amazing concept/goal that aspires to be what the world should be. However, do to differences in cultures once the union gets too far is where I draw the line. Turkey in the EU? Open boarders with people who don't like your way of life is a mix for disaster. If I was ANY euopeam country, I would support the EU.. but close the damn borders to anyone who represents a high possibility of threat.

The idea of the EU is a very good one of bringing people around Europe together, I think the human race is going to have to learn sooner or later that we have to work together because the more advanced society becomes, the more dangerous we become to ourselves, at the moment we have around 200 countries around the world, with some much divide, I can't help but think that will be disastrous for the human race in the future.

 

As for Turkey, they've been trying to join the EU for like 40 years and still not even close, the EU won't let them in until there are fundamental changes in that country, in other words, they become a lot more moderate in their thinking.

16 hours ago, SpeedyTheSnail said:

Obviously I am from the US and many people here will disregard my opinion because of my views however:

 

If I were there I would vote to leave because:

England was THE world superpower for a very very long time. They as a country will outlast the EU as well as the UK. England will withstand the sands of time, this is one such move for it to survive (or her?).

 

The EU was meant to compete with the US as well as perform other functions. It seems that a foreign government that doesn't represent all citizens poses a problem. With the mass immigration of refugees who do cause lots of problems, it was only a matter of time.

 

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.

Key word being WAS the superpower, that was a long time ago and actually that's part of the problem in the UK, some are still thinking of the glory days of the past which are not realistic today with the US, EU and power shifting towards Asia, the reality is that the UK is going to keep droping down the ladder political and economically over the coming decades

9 hours ago, restroom said:

And yet MANY people use our past in argument to secure things. Second world war is used a lot in the EU, to represent how things have changed for the better, but anyone that questions them is branded a racist nazi who wants to go back to the second world war era. This means we ended up with an EU dictatorship and is one of the mason reasons people voted to leave, which I totally understand.

 

However I don't think they realise the reality that we will still trade with the EU, we will still have immigrants and refugees we will simply loose any power we previously had to influence trade decisions and laws in the EU itself which may or may not have been a benefit to us.

I bet my house you cannot name a single law that the EU passed that wasn't first agreed by the UK. If you think the EU is a dictatorship you really need to educate yourself before you comment.

35 minutes ago, Depicus said:

I bet my house you cannot name a single law that the EU passed that wasn't first agreed by the UK. If you think the EU is a dictatorship you really need to educate yourself before you comment.

2 is actually the answer, and we agreed with like 4729 or something like that, so yeh, very much not a dictatorship and the thought that we're governed by EU rules is silly, we're governed by our own rules, many of which we have in common with other countries, so decided to create them at an EU level.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/14/uk-obliged-judgments-of-european-courts-official-document-from-m/

 

Although not sure if the telegraph is deemed the same as the dail mail or not.

 

Also, take consideration of deportation of two terrorists which was blocked by Brussels and cost the tax payer a shed load to over turn.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't agree in leaving, but can understand why some feel is best.

1 hour ago, restroom said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/14/uk-obliged-judgments-of-european-courts-official-document-from-m/

 

Although not sure if the telegraph is deemed the same as the dail mail or not.

 

Also, take consideration of deportation of two terrorists which was blocked by Brussels and cost the tax payer a shed load to over turn.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't agree in leaving, but can understand why some feel is best.

I think you are confusing the European Union with the European Court of Human Rights, the later we signed up to voluntarily and outside of the EU and will still be bound by even after Brexit unless of course we repealed the law our own parliament enacted. Which we could have done in or outside the EU.

25 minutes ago, Depicus said:

I think you are confusing the European Union with the European Court of Human Rights, the later we signed up to voluntarily and outside of the EU and will still be bound by even after Brexit unless of course we repealed the law our own parliament enacted. Which we could have done in or outside the EU.

With that being the case, the in campaign should have made that clear. A LOT of leave votes appear to have been made on the back of this...

Just now, restroom said:

With that being the case, the in campaign should have made that clear. A LOT of leave votes appear to have been made on the back of this...

The IN campaign was run by a large group of complete ******* ******** but to be fair so was the OUT campaign. Sad that our governance is left to these people.

9 hours ago, Depicus said:

The IN campaign was run by a large group of complete ******* ******** but to be fair so was the OUT campaign. Sad that our governance is left to these people.

Completely agree. I went to one of the leave campaign tents and asked them to tell me what would happen to my wife if we voted leave. His answer was... the in campaign should make that clear... I mean seriously, why would the in camp need to make it clear what will happen when we leave? I pointed that out to the bloke and he just kept saying "look at the financial benefits". Awful. Neither side could give us any assurance. The only sure thing was that staying would not result in a lot changing.

 

Now my whole life is in limbo, not knowing if to move to my wife's country and risk me being deported later or stay put and risk our government deporting her and leaving my kids with either just a mum or just a dad.

  • Like 1
3 hours ago, restroom said:

Now my whole life is in limbo, not knowing if to move to my wife's country and risk me being deported later or stay put and risk our government deporting her and leaving my kids with either just a mum or just a dad.

 

To be honest, and i'm no MP and i understand you're probably suffering a fair amount of anxiety over this, repatriation of non-UK born British citizens is VERY unlikely to happen. It was just something banded about by the leave campaign to try and muster up votes. It's very unlikely to happen because if suddenly Britain up ended all foreign nationals and sent them packing the country would completely collapse and any leading government knows this. They're making a big fuss to appear powerful but it will never happen and i will put my life savings on that fact.

 

You didn't say where your wife comes from but if it's the EU then they'll always be welcome because its a stipulation of any EU trade agreement which we absolutely must have, and if she's from outside the EU then nothing has changed any way. This seems to be a fact that a fair few leave voters i've spoken to can't get in to their heads.

 

I know this one help relieve any anxieties you may have but it's a start.

On 04/07/2016 at 5:46 PM, restroom said:

So whereas I could see reason to leave, but didn't vote because my own situation was at risk by voting so, I now strongly believe in remain now the truth of the leave party has appeared.

Given how close it was... If you and those like you HAD actually voted, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess?  Not that I'm blaming you, but still... it would have helped.

 

Edited by FloatingFatMan
3 hours ago, restroom said:

Now my whole life is in limbo, not knowing if to move to my wife's country and risk me being deported later or stay put and risk our government deporting her and leaving my kids with either just a mum or just a dad.

Your best option is probably to start making enquiries about becoming a citizen of that country.  You should have the option, considering you're married to a national from there.

16 minutes ago, FloatingFatMan said:

Given how close it was... If you and those like you HAD actually voted, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess?  Not that I'm blaming you, but still... it would have helped.

 

That's the thing. At the time I was leaning to the leave campaign, but my personal circumstances meant I would be nuts to vote leave, so I chose not to, that way I couldn't complaint either way (although I'm complaining simply about the position I'm now in).

 

You are probably right and hopefully there will be a second referendum, where I would totally vote IN. Since the vote was complete, its kind of shown the leave campaign for what it really was. Instantly denying a lot of their own promises ever existed was disgusting!

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Just the price of doing business. The scamble to pull as much from the web as possible is happening, and it's happening before a case like this changes how or what is legal do to with AI in terms of data harvesting. But even then as we've seen with the likes of Google who ignore cookie requests and just accept the fact they'll get fined, it's built into their business price model now. AI is here, its not going away. Their reward if any from the court case would be best suited to trying to incorprate AI or licence their end points as authentic human verified content. The problem is, as we've seen these same news papers are using AI themselves.
    • Which finger's fingernail are we talking about? I can see how not having this info can lead to massive differences in interpretation.
    • This Chinese company is reportedly developing a feature Apple and Samsung can only dream of by Hamid Ganji While companies like Apple and Samsung have been relatively conservative with their devices’ battery capacities in recent years, Chinese manufacturers have taken the competition to the next level by introducing significantly larger batteries. However, the latest report from China suggests that a local company may already be developing a smartphone with a whopping 14,000mAh battery. Chinese leaker Digital Chat Station claimed on Weibo that a smartphone maker is developing a device with a 14,000mAh battery. If true, it would be the largest battery ever used in a smartphone and could, in theory, provide up to a week of battery life on a single charge. The leaker did not reveal the name of the company behind the device, but there are some clues. This week, HONOR unveiled the X80 Pro Max in China with an 11,000mAh battery and 90W wired charging support. The company also launched the Honor Win in January, which packs a 10,000mAh battery. HONOR, a former subsidiary of Huawei, has a proven track record of developing smartphones with unusually large batteries. However, other Chinese brands, including Xiaomi, have also launched devices such as the Xiaomi 17 Pro Max with 7,500mAh batteries. Though Chinese users on Weibo also believe the company behind the new battery is HONOR. Interestingly, Digital Chat Station said the device with the 14,000mAh battery weighs around 220 grams, making it lighter than the Apple iPhone 17 Pro Max (233 grams) and slightly heavier than the Samsung Galaxy S26 Ultra (214 grams). The iPhone 17 Pro Max currently packs a 5,088mAh battery in eSIM-only versions, while the Galaxy S26 Ultra features a 5,000mAh battery. Neither device is expected to see a dramatic increase in battery capacity in its next-generation successor. So when it comes to battery comparison, Chinese brands are unbeaten. HONOR smartphones are currently available in the EU, but the Chinese brand has no official presence in the United States due to restrictions imposed by the U.S. government.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      461
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      137
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!