Just panicking. Even in a very doubtful worse case scenario the actual effects would take years, even decades to be noticeable, and the bank of England is rich enough to easily hold the economy for longer than that even if the politicians were completely useless.
Unless your job depends literally of the EU single market, it probably won’t affect you at all.
Then again, if you are thinking of moving to commonwealth places like Canada, NZ or Australia, they are apparently pretty nice countries.
The non-panic position largely assumes that Britain gets to keep all perks of being an EU member while being allowed to shed all responsibilities and costs. (And Gung Hay Fat Chance, as Phil Frank used to put it.) Every other combination leads to at least some economic disturbance, and in the current volatile world (of democratic republics turning increasingly authoritarian) it could trigger real upheaval.
No it doesn’t. I’m not aware of anyone who voted to leave who isn’t expecting a financial hit. Even a large one. It was never about “perks” or jobs or even the economy generally. That’s why so many Remainers are confused, and while the media continues to bark up the wrong trees in the wrong wood.
The only surprise to some Leave voters is how things have got better since the referendum.
I think its general impact will be no worse the recession of 2007+. Its specific impact on your depends of your job. Farmers could well be the worst hit because they will probably no longer have the price supports and high import tariffs protecting them.
I’m not sure what is going to happen to the economy, though I doubt it will be good. However, my biggest worry is that as a nation we will become increasingly insular and those with intolerant views become emboldened to express and act on them. This has already occurred to some extent.
I don’t see any outcome that does not greatly weaken the UK, economically and politically, for at least a generation. A self-inflicted wound too. Oh well, at least there’ll be less foreigners about, right? :rolleyes:
From the crash of 2007/8 to the underperforming of the euro, the failure of Greece and on and on and on. The world in general is terrible at making accurate predictions about unprecedented situations. History is littered with missed opportunities to warn of disaster and scaremongering that never comes to pass.
To paraphrase Niels Bohr, It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.
The economists all throw darts at a barn door and only after the fact do we get to draw the target in and one lucky bozo gets to claim foresight and accuracy.
So my prediction? shit will happen, time will pass, deals will get made and the world will turn much as before. Some will be better off, some worse and in 30 years time we’ll be in a good position to make an accurate after-the-fact prediction which will be fuck-all use for the upcoming period and will be studiously ignored by all political and economic commentators in the future.
I think we can be certain that we will be worse off in our trade relations with Europe, as the EU will be obliged to make an example of the UK to deter others following through the exit. It’s terrible to think that the one way to salvage things will be for nationalist/isolationist arseholes like Trump and Le Pen to prosper, and forge trade deals as a reward for our anti-globalist stance. So a touch of panic might not be inappropriate.
Largely what Novelty Bobble says, the real answer is a mystery.
But I would say that it’s reasonably safe to say that the UK won’t suddenly burst into flames, spontaneously, and sink into the sea. Whatever chaos and layoffs there may or might not be, the truth remains that there are plenty of countries that are not part of the EU who carry on day-to-day just fine. Eventually, the UK will just be one of those - after everything has settled - not a hell-hole fit for the next Snake Pliskin movie.
On the other hand, even if there are no massive layoffs and the transition to being just another non-EU country occurs without much fuss, that will give the people of 30 years in the future the ability to look back and go, “Nyah hah! Look, the EU wasn’t so good after all!” Or even if there is a lot of chaos, but eventually it all settles and the UK is doing well again, they’ll still be able to say that Brexit turned out all right.
The thing is that it’s not just enough to wait 30 years, you also need a control UK; a UK that stayed in the EU for 30 years, to compare with. Without that, you can’t say what effect Brexit actually had. I think it’s a safe guess that the UK would be more prosperous and part of a more powerful state, as part of the EU, than it will be on its own. You also need a control Earth. A stronger EU will be better at keeping the Earth on a trajectory towards modernization, collaboration, and democratization. A world of small, independent countries will help authoritarian, dog-eats-dog nations to gain more ground on the international stage and hold other nations down.
But without a control UK and a control Earth, you’ll just look back at Brexit in 30 years and go, “Look, unemployment is fine. The country isn’t in flames. Everyone adjusted. Life went on.” It will miss the larger image that it’s not just whether things were “fine”. The question is whether you’re comparing your “fine” against the world of 30 years earlier or the world of the same time, along a different timeline.
That’s a given, but also all the non-EU trade agreements we are party to due to our membership of the EU. So that is essentially all our trade agreements needing replacing -from a position of weakness - to be anything more than WTO terms, with all that implies. (Even trading on WTO terms is a clusterfuck of complexity Explainers search | The Institute for Government )
But I’m sure Boris will just swan in and charm everybody because he went to the right school, and all will be sunshine and rainbows and puppies!
It’s going to be an absolute fucking disaster. The EU are going to want to screw us to deter anyone else from leaving, Trump’s “America First” policy isn’t going to help, since when did China play fair in trade, can’t see the old Commonwealth countries wanting to help especially as we fucked them off when Ted Heath took us into the EEC in the first place, which doesn’t leave us much to go on…
Now how is this going to be a big disaster? And it’s nonsense that the UK is in a position of weakness. Small countries do well in getting trade deals, while the EU has so many conflicts among the members that a deal can’t be reached (for example with the U.S.).
I tend to see the result of the referendum as a negotiating position - ‘the project, as it stands, is not desirable or sustainable. Lets talk about our concerns?’
Despite the public persona of confidence from the 27, what effect on the EU will the world’s 5th largest economy leaving it have. Will the EU become more receptive to change, for example. This is the biggest event in the organisations history, there will necessarily be much reflection … and not a little support for seeing this as an opportunity many have wanted.
I’m always a bit uncomfortable when the suggestion that the EU will want to make an example of Britain, pour encourager les autres, is put forward as some kind of pro-Remain point. It makes the EU sound one step above a protection racket. And it requires one to think of it as some kind of controlling, undemocratic superstate, just like the UKIP nutters who refer to it as the “EUSSR.”
The fact is that the EU consists of free countries with capitalist economies, in which individuals and companies are free to trade with (almost) whoever they choose, according to wherever the trade is most mutually advantageous. A widget maker in Darmstadt who needs some olive spantles, and knows of a manufacturer in Derby who supplies particularly fine and attractively priced olive spantles, is not going to want his own government stopping him buying from there. He probably couldn’t care less about Brexit. So ultimately, if the EU consists of democratic countries, the peoples of which want to trade with the UK, then their governments will seek it.
The countries that the EU does maintain trade barriers with are those that it deems to not be operating on a level playing field. But even if some of the “hard Brexit” people are fantasising about turning the UK into some low-tax, European Hong Kong, it isn’t likely to happen because there’s scant political support for it in the country. The UK is likely to continue to operate as a European-style, relatively high tax and spend economy, and the EU will have no reason to mete out special punishment to it.
All of that is not to say that leaving the EU is a good idea, or that the WTO option wouldn’t suddenly throw up a huge mess of barriers to trade, which I believe is the case made by the blog that the OP links to.
I’m afraid the EU’s answer is likely to be 'we’re done talking about your concerns about the project. We’ve devoted a lot of time and effort over the years to talking about them; you’re still not happy and you want out. That’s regrettable, but it’s your right. Given that you’re leaving the project, your views about its desirability and sustainability are of less significance to us than they once were. Now, shall we talk about the terms of separation, and about any external relationship with the EU that you might like to have?"
My memory may be lying to me, but I feel like the UK made several attempts to bring up concerns and renegotiate them over the last decade or two.
More importantly, the referendum didn’t have an option for, “Oh, well, if they let us rewrite our own position into things, then we can stay.” The overall end-result has to be that they’re out. The only question is whether they leave with nothing or a few trade treaties with the EU in set to start on the date they exit.
Unfortunately, if there is a result of Brexit of any sort beyond establishing what all sort of scorched earth strategy they’re going to take towards potential leavers, it will be towards greater freedom of the member states.
As one might know, the US was initially set up with great freedom for its member states and the result was, on the whole, implosive. Greater federalization is the real path forward for the EU, but that is a very difficult path to go. Even though it might make the most sense for the union and, in the long run, all of the states. In the short run, the nations would be giving up their sovereignty to the mass decisions of mostly foreigners. Even with Russia misbehaving right next door, there’s still insufficient threat to make Europeans feel like it’s worth banding together that tightly.
Minus such a threat, the EU is always going to be weaker and more prone to falling apart than it really should be. And any loss, particularly of one of the strongest states, is going to act as a strong tug on the string holding everything together.