I’m not denying there’s an issue, but what is the practical effect of this on the average Brexit voter? I suspect at the moment it’s largely zero, although I do appreciate it could be storing up problems longer-term.
I just realised I used the wrong ‘reply’ button in my previous post, so you may have missed it. It wasn’t intended as a rhetorical question, to be clear - though of course you don’t owe me a response, so no worries either way.
I did think you were being rhetorical.
And the answer is: to the extent I encounter the “average Brexit voter” anymore, it doesn’t seem to really affect their views as they simply continue to blame the EU and “Remoaners” for any negative effects of Brexit. So their view is that the drop in trade is due to EU countries being meany-meany-meanheads, and that’s why we were right to leave.
Thanks - sorry, that wasn’t the angle I was going for with my question (and the fault was mine). I should have said, how has this affected the average ‘man in the street’ so far? As I’ve said previously, I don’t know because I am extremely fortunate to be comfortably off, but for me the effect has been exactly zero so far. For many fishermen and (I assume) farmers, it looks like it has been disastrous so far. But they make up a pretty small percentage of the population. I don’t want to dismiss those issues, I just wondered if there has been any wider effect yet? It seems to me that if food exports have fallen, this could lead to lower food prices in UK, perhaps? Which could be a short-term benefit for the majority. Again, not saying that I think that’s necessarily good - I’d rather pay a fair price for quality goods that lets someone else make a living. But again, that flows from my aforementioned economic privilege.
Part of the problem is that what Britain produces and what Britain eats are not necessarily the same thing - the fishing difference (that the Continent likes fish caught in British waters and vice versa) has already been flagged. Whether this will result in some sort of push to buy more of those products that Brits have not traditionally preferred remains to be seen. Rick Stein needs to get out there and start pushing John Dory recipes hard, I guess.
There are still a lot of unknowns and speculation, in part because it’s still early and in larger part because it’s hard to completely unpick the effects of the pandemic from the effects of Brexit. I’m sure the working poor will get screwed because the working poor always get screwed when things change, but how and by how much remains unclear.
And Briton’s are having to flutter back from sunny Spain:
So, vote for the UK to leave the EU but then expect the EU to continue to provide their comforts (Sun, sea, sangria, reciprocal health care and the like) …?
While I do have some sympathy - I’m also trying, hard, not to laugh too loudly…
“Also, our faces have been eaten by leopards!”
“I would never have voted for face-eating leopards if I’d thought they would eat my face!”
To be fair (purely for the mental exercise of it), most of us have been conditioned by a lifetime of politicians not doing what they promised.
Ah yes, the classic “I voted against my own self-interest, but I never expected those bloody politicians would actually go through with it - damn you, politicians, it’s all your fault!” excuse.
It was intended as a joke, not an excuse.
Oh. Well, in that case: ha ha ha.
You do seem to be in a good mood today! 
I know I am late to the party but as far as I could see no one had responded to this.
The only reason that most of the world’s economies are growing at a higher rate than the EU is because they are third world shitholes that are modernising. The UK isn’t going to become an Asian tiger just because it leaves the EU. It is already a mature economy. Although the way the UK is heading you may get your wish - you may become a complete shithole where rows of menial workers slave for pence per hour - and then the only way is up. Woo frickin’ hoo.
Further, your comment about making alliances with the fastest growing economies of the world is a joke. Why would they make alliances with the UK? What bargaining power does the UK have that it can use to get an advantageous deal? As usual, Brexiter arguments are all about pointing to the land of milk and honey, without a single thought as to whether there is any way of actually getting there.
Actually it was a way of putting a negative spin on the simple fact that the UK was in a good place and Brexit was going to take it to somewhere worse.
“We are somewhere good. Why do we want to become a shithole?”
“You’re so negative, no wonder no one likes you”.
You are late to the party - that is a perfect description of the UK now …
Those “third world shitholes that are modernising”, or to use a more polite term, emerging markets, are the economies the UK needs to engage with. It’s complicated. It requires balancing requirements for good governance and good human rights policies with trade opportunities. The UK on its own can assess each emerging market and decide if it wants to do business with them. The UK in the EU would be relying on a committee assessment from a moribund bureaucracy dealing with historical relationships and selfish motivations of 27 other countries.
To answer your question “What bargaining power does the UK have that it can use to get an advantageous deal?”, the UK is the sixth largest economy in the world. Countries by GDP: The Top 25 Economies in the World
Would you ask why an emerging economy would do business with Brazil or Canada?
There seems to be a theme that a trade deal is an adversarial process, and the way to be a winner is to to be the biggest bully making the deal. Trade treaties should be win-win deals for both sides. The UK has a big enough economy to be a strong trading partner with every country in the world, and will be better able to create win-win deals without worrying about the requirements of 27 other countries who are parties to those deals. You’re scared of the UK not being able to stand up for itself. I’m looking forward to the UK standing up for itself.
Is there a scientific method for distinguishing between being anti-immigration and racism? The comments you quoted certainly conflate the two topics. Look at the noun used in your quote " xeno-racism". The authors of the “scientific” study you’re quoting have a pre-assumption that opposing immigration and racism are the same thing. For anyone who holds that belief, there’s a 100% chance they’re going to find Brexit voters racist. The reality is that the Brexit vote was complicated and based on many issues. Immigration was certainly a major topic, and most adamant racists in the UK would have been anti-immigration and would have voted for Brexit, if they voted. But to describe that as “the core of Brexit” voters is unfounded and ignores the main reason for the vote which was a referendum against the EU government.
If two sides are campaigning on any public issue, and one side
- constantly tells blatant lies
- plays on emotions rather than presenting facts
- uses scare tactics and tries to create fear
- has shady and untrustworthy characters leading it
- has dubious and secretive sources of funding
You’re talking about the Remain side?
So you will now admit you’re prediction was wrong?