The insanity that is Brexit... 17 replies

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Nemmerle Forum Mod

Voice of joy and sunshine

298,547 XP

26th May 2003

0 Uploads

28,159 Posts

6 Threads

#11 1 week ago
Posted by Lindale
Posted by Nemmerle

The best way to learn a language is to speak it, and Europe is one land mass, no real borders to speak of - you can just drive from one country to another. 

Part of me wonders how the UK would have done as part of the EU if it had been connected by land.

Plans for a bridge across the Channel have existed since the late 1800s. Boris Johnson also fired a few shots at how a bridge needs to exist. Some years back, civil engineers gave Margaret Thatcher plans for a 21-mile bridge across the Dover Narrows. Yes, we do certainly have the technology to do it. We have bridges today which traverse a lot longer than 21 miles.


The problem with a bridge that long is the sheer amount of money required. Off the top of my head, I think the top 5 longest bridges in the world are all in China. As for how UK could come up with £3 BILLION is no easy thing to swallow. Even if France paid in half, £1.5 billion is still a nightmare to organise. Good luck getting Tories to organise it. Granted, a toll system would repay the entire amount in 5-6 years, but do you really want your money tied up for that long?

I can't speak to the feasibility of the idea beyond what's written there - presumably there were some challenges with it that account for why people built a rail tunnel and enjoyed all the admin that comes with that. (Perhaps something to do with wanting a static point for checks.)

As to the money side of it - 5-6 years isn't a ridiculous amount of time to have your money tied up if you're a country, nor is 3 billion a ridiculous amount to pay for a major piece of infrastructure. The problem there - however - is that governments aren't countries, and are loathe to spend anything on infrastructure. Because, if they work the deal as a service contract, they can saddle the next government with the bill. No-one wants to invest in infrastructure that will help the next person in power keep the people who have to live in that country happy - everyone, in fact, wants the next person who is in power to have a very hard time so much as keeping the lights on.

So what's desirable is to buy a lot of services now, and put the payment for those services into a contract that doesn't become due until after you're no longer there, or which you have the relationships to renegotiate if you do happen to be there.


It's selling out the future and it's something that our politicians have been doing very successfully, and largely blaming foreigners for the consequences of, for quite some time now. Find a group that's easy to hate and blame them for the fact that you've made everyone poor and miserable. When one excuse goes, you just have to find another group you can encourage people to hate. Blacks, drug dealers, muslims, whatever. Just keep people hating the person who lives next to them, or in the next town over. ¬_¬




Lindale Forum Mod

Mister Angry Rules Guy

241,682 XP

1st February 2010

0 Uploads

23,476 Posts

2 Threads

#12 1 week ago

Disunited Queendom also doesn't seem to want things that help the economy.


As for static points for checks, all you need are two, one at each end of the bridge. Check each lorry coming on, and again coming off. That is simple enough to do. This is a toll bridge anyway, so you already have the toll stops at each end of the bridge. If you need check stops, have them at the toll stops. Do it all in one stop.


As for those challenges you asked about, they revolve around two major factors


1: The Channel is one of the world's busiest shipping lanes, so the process of building a bridge shuts down that much-needed shipping. This is exactly the equivalent of shutting down a main motorway while building an overpass or interchange. The gods forbid you should shut down the M6. But, again, that is short-term, exactly as you mentioned. No one wants to look ahead to the benefits AFTER the bridge is built.


2: Both sides of The Dover Narrows are lined with chalk. Everyone knows about the Chalk Cliffs of Dover, but few know the entire Calais area also has chalk cliffs, because Great Britain was once connected to the mainland. Chalk is near-impossible to anchor anything, much less something as large as a bridge.


In the end, maybe a road Chunnel, or two, would be the better option. But, how can we convince the current administration to look ahead to the future far enough to pay for such a project?


filesnation_by_lindale_ff-da1kplo.png



Last edited by Lindale 1 week ago

MrFancypants Forum Admin

The Bad

217,192 XP

7th December 2003

0 Uploads

20,013 Posts

6 Threads

#13 1 week ago
Posted by Andron Taps
Posted by Lindale

As members of the European union, any EU citizen is allowed to live and work in any any EU nation. As long as the nation is a member of the EU, you can go nearly anywhere for nearly job. In addition, businesses get minimal import and export fees, if any at all, which reduces prices all across the EU.

Surely that must include language training?  If not, I think you'll have a tough time growing up in Spain and then finding work in Germany.


It helps to speak the language, but often it is not a requirement. Especially in big companies, where the default language is English anyway. I know a bunch of people who just showed up with the right job qualifications who started learning the language after they arrived.




Lindale Forum Mod

Mister Angry Rules Guy

241,682 XP

1st February 2010

0 Uploads

23,476 Posts

2 Threads

#14 6 days ago

English is the default Official Language of the entire world anyway, thanks to half the world once being the Great British Empire. Although, the other half of the world speaking English is mainly due to America being the world's vigilante.


That said, the vast majority of Europe's languages descend from Germanic or Latin origins. That means, if you speak German or French/Italian, you can go nearly anywhere in Europe, and be able to work out what someone is saying.


As for the Easter Bloc nations (Poland, Croatia, etc), even a basic knowledge of Russian goes a long way. But even there, most will speak at least one Germanic or Latin language.


As for learning, I completely agree that the best way is to be there, and learn by natural daily experience.


filesnation_by_lindale_ff-da1kplo.png



Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

356,503 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,660 Posts

779 Threads

#15 4 days ago
Posted by FileTrekker

MP's won't budge, Brussels won't budge, May won't budge and the whole thing is looking like a collosal fuckup, honestly.

We knew that at the time, though. Did it anyway. 


Now I'm not sure what the future holds 

I'm no psychic, but yet more fuckery-dumb-dumb seems probable.

but it seems ever more likely that a no-deal Brexit is on the horizon, and that's bad news as far as I can see.

What's the solutions now? It's hurting my head keeping up with it.

There are no easy solutions to Brexit, because it was a stupid idea in the first place, and the fact that the government is ploughing ahead with it regardless of facts or public opinion is just compounding the issue. 

The uncertainty is the biggest problem, though. Do or do not, make a fucking decision. That we still haven't figured out what we want Brexit to even look like at this late stage, and that there are still debates raging about whether we should even do it at all a mere month before the arbitrary deadline that May forced us into for no apparent reason, is absurd, and probably causing just as much damage as Brexit alone.

While Theresa May is leading the charge through the wheat fields, though, we've got little hope of coming up with any solution, let alone an easy one. The woman entered into negotiations with little clue as to what she hoped to achieve, emerged from them declaring victory even as her EU counterparts said "errr… no, we've not actually budged on our no-budge issues at all, shut up though", and then tried to throw her "Brexit-but-not-really" deal at MPs, knowing full well that they wouldn't go for any of it, and nearly causing a constitutional crisis by locking herself in the bathroom with it to try and delay their voting on it for as long as she could. 

The absolute biggest problem that I can see is that May has been treating this like an internal EU negotiation; one mate to another, equal partners with equal rights, whereas the EU sure as shit fucking has not been doing that at all. She should have been treating it as a third party negotiating with a sovereign nation. Each out for their own interests, neither owing the other jack shit.

Take the big Irish backstop issue, for instance. Do you know why the EU has been forcing it up our anuses so hard? It's not because they suddenly give a shit, it's because it's very much in their best interests to force the UK to remain in a customs union (sans any voting rights) for as long as fucking possible. The deal May has proposed would leave us as a name-only EU member almost indefinitely, because the nebulous "once you've solved the backstop issue" clause could be abused theoretically forever by EU officials, who could just continue saying "nah, sorry, we don't like that solution" for as long as they wanted.

If we're going to leave the EU, let's just do it. Negotiate deals with them after they no longer hold any sway over our government. Treat them as a self-interested, independent party who owes us nothing, just as they've been doing. We're already negotiating from a position of weakness - contrary to what the Daily Fail would have us believe, they absolutely do not need us as much as we need them - so let's at least negotiate from a realistic, influence-free position of weakness.

We're fucked either way, but if we're doing this, let's at least pretend to do it sensibly. 

The only 'easy' solution, however, is to get rid of Theresa May. She's astonishingly bad at this.




Last edited by Mr. Matt 4 days ago

Lindale Forum Mod

Mister Angry Rules Guy

241,682 XP

1st February 2010

0 Uploads

23,476 Posts

2 Threads

#16 4 days ago

1: I heard of a possible vote of no confidence against Theresa May. Is a vote of no confidence actually possible?


2: If that does happen, and May gets impeached, will that stop Brexit?


filesnation_by_lindale_ff-da1kplo.png



Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

356,503 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,660 Posts

779 Threads

#17 4 days ago
Posted by Lindale

1: I heard of a possible vote of no confidence against Theresa May. Is a vote of no confidence actually possible?

Her own party has already done that, and somehow she fucking survived. Then the Labour Party tried to oust her instead, and she somehow fucking survived that as well. Now she's essentially untouchable for a year or two, unless she does some crimes or resigns of her own accord. There are systems in place to protect against repeated, vexatious attempts to oust a PM. Getting rid a month before the deadline she forced us into arbitrarily probably won't help much anymore anyway, to be honest. It's too fucked to undo.

2: If that does happen, and May gets impeached, will that stop Brexit?

No, not by itself anyway. She's just the one muddling through it all; Brexit's not actually dependent upon her continued premiership. To stop Brexit, Parliament would have to overturn the EU Withdrawal Act, which as far as I'm aware only allows for an easy amendment to the leaving date in its present form, not a wholesale cancellation. To do that, and to have any chance of it passing through the House of Commons unmolested, they'd almost certainly need to hold a second referendum. Though the first referendum wasn't legally binding in any way, shape or form, thus making this whole debacle even dumber incidentally, I can't imagine any MP attempting to go against it without first consulting the public again, because it would be political suicide and might even trigger some degree of civil unrest. The government is, at present, against holding a second referendum. 

Last I heard, anyway. They change their minds - and membership - every five bloody minutes these days.

Cancelling our the invocation of Article 50 is probably the easiest bit. Members of the ECJ have unofficially suggested that we can do that if we wanted to. It seems extraordinarily unlikely that the EU would be motivated to stop Britain remaining, unless they wished to force us to reapply under worse membership terms than the favourable ones we presently have. Which is actually a possibility, now that I think about it.




Last edited by Mr. Matt 4 days ago

Lindale Forum Mod

Mister Angry Rules Guy

241,682 XP

1st February 2010

0 Uploads

23,476 Posts

2 Threads

#18 3 days ago

Then the more immediate question is whether or not there is ANY way to stop Brexit at this point. At this point, it seems like a No Deal Brexit is going to be the only outcome.


filesnation_by_lindale_ff-da1kplo.png



  • 1
  • 2