Brexit and the Consequences

[tomorton]

Hiya Tom,

If you are of the view that I am wrong to assert that Ponzi schemes always fail (sooner or later) then, yes, it's reasonable to believe that the EU can potter along indefinitely. Quite literally, they would be the exception that proves the rule.

My view is that the EU are cacking themselves over the divorce bill (with good reason) because they know that the rich nations will have to dig even deeper into their pockets to prop up the poor ones. Alternatively, they can cut the budgets to the weaker members. Either way, it'll lead to even more discontent and, inevitably (IMO), sooner or later another country will say 'enough is enough'. It doesn't much matter if one of the net beneficiaries does that but, when another net contributor on the scale of the U.K. does it - it'll be curtains for the EU. It's just a question of time.

Unless the EU reforms - it will definitely fail - no shadow of a doubt about that in my mind at all. The really big fear is that it will be Germany (following, say, the collapse of Deutsche Bank). That would not only be catastrophic to the EU - but could precipitate a global financial crisis that would completely dwarf that of ten years ago.


Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that - but I see why you've interpreted my comment that way. To clarify, I'm in favour of EU countries facilitating trade between one another as that's in everyone's best interests. That was the original idea back in the 70s and I still support it. What I object to is the way that the EU has morphed into a one size fits all political monster which, IMO, isn't in anyone's best interests - least of all ours.


Agreed, I think everyone's clear about that now - largely thanks to last year's referendum. Prior to that, a great many people thought (me included to some degree), that the EU was just one big happy family; a lovely club brimming with sweetness 'n light and bursting with goodwill and good intentions to all. That seems spectacularly naive now - we're all so much wiser!
Tim.

Well Tim, I dunno if the Eu's doomed. But as its a political animal and not an economic one, its extinction will (might) be from political factors, not economic. Most probably forced abandonment of the USofE objective. If that goes, the europhiles will see no further gain from the pain of keeping a struggling economic / monetary union together, that's not what they signed up for.

Please, the EU has not morphed into a political monster at all - it always always was one. From its earliest entities it has always been a pathway body towards the USofE. What has morphed is our perception of it, after Farage so noisily criticised it for this. His one good deed. Prior to that it suited our pinkish/blueish politicians to keep quiet about what we had been signed up for.

Still suits most of them.

 

[dbphoenix]

The general idea is not much different from Maria Theresa's in the 18th century, that if the constituents are federated in some way, e.g., family, they will be less likely to war with each other. This was allegedly the idea behind the United States, the League of Nations, the United Nations, etc. Despots are well-served by cries of sovereignty and the fracturing of alliances. We've been through this again and again, and yet we are eager to go through it again.

The human race suffers from a severe learning disability.

 

[Pat494]

The general idea is not much different from Maria Theresa's in the 18th century, that if the constituents are federated in some way, e.g., family, they will be less likely to war with each other. This was allegedly the idea behind the United States, the League of Nations, the United Nations, etc. Despots are well-served by cries of sovereignty and the fracturing of alliances. We've been through this again and again, and yet we are eager to go through it again.

The human race suffers from a severe learning disability.

More like under Germany's control. When Merkel goes all sorts of people will appear out of the mist vying for power imho

 

[timsk]

. . . Despots are well-served by cries of sovereignty and the fracturing of alliances. We've been through this again and again, and yet we are eager to go through it again.

I'm no fan of Theresa May dbp, but she's hardly a despot or, even, liable to turn into one post Brexit.

The human race suffers from a severe learning disability.

Very true. That said, even those afflicted with a severe learning disability can see that trying to force 27 different shaped pegs into a single round hole really isn't a very good idea.
Tim.

 

[tomorton]

More like under Germany's control. When Merkel goes all sorts of people will appear out of the mist vying for power imho

I daren't post anything more going back over Germany's appalling expansionist foreign policy in Europe. It remains to be seen if this was a prior historical era. Or we're still in it.

 

[dbphoenix]

More like under Germany's control. When Merkel goes all sorts of people will appear out of the mist vying for power imho

The Third Reich was the same general idea, though one likes to ascribe higher motives to the concept of nations that are freely united.

 

[Pat494]

Adolph must be having a good laugh. Germany controlling an increasingly centralised Europe without a shot being fired and the UK being punished for daring to leave.

 

[dbphoenix]

Adolph must be having a good laugh. Germany controlling an increasingly centralised Europe without a shot being fired and the UK being punished for daring to leave.

Clearly they learned something after having been occupied for more than 40 years.

 

[sminicooper]

There were few scientists as we understand the term during the pre-Renaissance era. The people who declared the world flat were the Church. You will find a mass of flat-earthers based in the US, who are similarly religiously driven.

The pre-Renaissance scientists were certainly different and although they were called "philosophers" they did mostly believe in a flat Earth until Pythagoras put them right in 6 BC. Despite later religious belief to the contrary, the early Christian church did in fact believe in a spherical earth. All of which of course just goes to show how inconsistent experts can be.

I've always thought that the good thing about experts is that you can always find one to support the view that you believe in. Unfortunately, unless you are an expert yourself in the chosen field then you have little choice but to accept what the experts say. It brings to mind medical opinion on smoking during the period 1920s to 1950s – especially in the USA – where the profession approved & even encouraged it while participating in tobacco company advertising.

So that's why I have a healthy disrespect for experts!

 

[sminicooper]

The general idea is not much different from Maria Theresa's in the 18th century, that if the constituents are federated in some way, e.g., family, they will be less likely to war with each other. This was allegedly the idea behind the United States, the League of Nations, the United Nations, etc. Despots are well-served by cries of sovereignty and the fracturing of alliances. We've been through this again and again, and yet we are eager to go through it again.

The human race suffers from a severe learning disability.

It's biologically hard-wired in.

 

[dbphoenix]

The pre-Renaissance scientists were certainly different and although they were called "philosophers" they did mostly believe in a flat Earth until Pythagoras put them right in 6 BC. Despite later religious belief to the contrary, the early Christian church did in fact believe in a spherical earth. All of which of course just goes to show how inconsistent experts can be.

I've always thought that the good thing about experts is that you can always find one to support the view that you believe in. Unfortunately, unless you are an expert yourself in the chosen field then you have little choice but to accept what the experts say. It brings to mind medical opinion on smoking during the period 1920s to 1950s – especially in the USA – where the profession approved & even encouraged it while participating in tobacco company advertising.

So that's why I have a healthy disrespect for experts!

Which is why the scientific method is so important: observe, hypothesize, test, analyze the data and so on. One needn't be an expert in order to understand that gravity is a given. Belief is one thing. Verifiable and replicable data are another.

As for smoking and lung cancer, beware of hindsight bias. It wasn't until the 50s that the link between the two became a concern. Otherwise, people knew in the 18th century that smoking wasn't "good for you". Nor was alcohol.

 

[Signalcalc]

How could you analyse Brexit - a sample of one?

 

[dbphoenix]

How could you analyse Brexit - a sample of one?

It's not the sole instance of secession in all of history.

 

[Signalcalc]

It's not the sole instance of secession in all of history.

Secessions are successful when the oppressor is weak. Still don't know the sample size.

 

[tomorton]

The pre-Renaissance scientists were certainly different and although they were called "philosophers" they did mostly believe in a flat Earth until Pythagoras put them right in 6 BC. Despite later religious belief to the contrary, the early Christian church did in fact believe in a spherical earth. All of which of course just goes to show how inconsistent experts can be.

I've always thought that the good thing about experts is that you can always find one to support the view that you believe in. Unfortunately, unless you are an expert yourself in the chosen field then you have little choice but to accept what the experts say. It brings to mind medical opinion on smoking during the period 1920s to 1950s – especially in the USA – where the profession approved & even encouraged it while participating in tobacco company advertising.

So that's why I have a healthy disrespect for experts!

Whether those pre-Renaissance guys were philosophers or priests, what they had to support their flat earth view was strength of belief, not strength of observation-based evidence.

The scientists in the 20's-50's didn't have it either because they hadn't looked for it. The fact that these groups were wrong doesn't undermine science or evidence-based decision-making. In fact it rather supports it.

 

[dbphoenix]

Indeed. The anti-science crowd seems to believe that since we don't know everything, we don't know anything. Bacteria weren't "discovered" until the 17th century, yet doctors were saving lives for centuries before that.

Duck Dynasty ran for eleven years. Cosmos ran for one. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[counter_violent]

Not going very well for the EU is it. How much more can they take.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41708844

 

[Pat494]

Capitalism buys and sells "experts" with few principles or great monetary needs.

 

[counter_violent]

More trouble at mill!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41712263

 

[sminicooper]

More trouble at mill!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41712263

On that link I also see that our impartial and agenda-less BBC reports that:

Top Stories
Labour: UK heading for no Brexit deal
Emily Thornberry predicts the UK's "intransigence" will stop agreement being reached with Brussels.​

Perhaps what Emily Thornberry really means is that the UK should roll over and and pay up whatever the EU Politburo deems to be their satisfaction. I really don't see how this equates to UK intransigence.

Good job there are some dedicated Brexiteers who will save us from such folly!