The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

	Quote:
	Oh look, I'm being lectured by a naturalised Brit with two passports.

What difference does it make. And no lecturing- you wrote about splitting the Union- and I, quite fairly, ask how you envisage this. What difference do my 2 passports make? My Swiss passport does not give me a Swiss pension, for sure. We are directly affected, our children are directly affected, our grandchildren are directly affected, our wider family and friends too. And you have the right to go back to Brexit Britain if you wish, no? And perhaps to go and live in the USA, I imagine.

And I give my honest and personal opinion - that people with the right to vote on such massive issues- should have to bear the consequences. Fair enough, and I know many agree. This is NOT personal at all- shame you seem to want to make it so, for whatever reason.

[Tom1234]

	Quote:
	And I give my honest and personal opinion - that people with the right to vote on such massive issues- should have to bear the consequences. Fair enough, and I know many agree.

My honest and personal opinion - the people of the U.K. (including the politicians, economists, commerce experts and so on) did not understand most of the issues before the referendum (a case of not knowing what you don't know)

If when people died, they were told they could chose between just dying - or going to a place called heaven, and they needed to vote on it - they'd quite rightly ask, "What's this place like?"

The pro-heaveners would say it was lovely, full of lovely clouds and nice harp music and others would say there isn't wasn't enough information to go on.

In reality, with Brexit, what should have happened is nothing - for at least five years until sufficient information was made available for people to make at least a more educated vote.

I'm not sure that blaming the people is helpful at all.

	Quote:	Tom1234
	It was partly a trick question. The Swiss government have used representative democracy in the form of the National Council and Federal Assembly to decide ongoing Nuclear power policy. The people obviously cannot be trusted in such a difficult and complex decision. (although there is an initiative to decide on the length of operation of current nuclear power plants (who knew that Frau Mueller, the old lady next door who used to work at Migros was such an expert metallurgist?))

Does Frau Mueller need to be an expert metallurgist? I would have thought for the purposes of voting, both sides of the argument would boil down to a couple of bullet points on cost, alternatives and environmental impact...if you know more, great, if you don't, you just need the salient points/impacts.

	Quote:	Tom1234
	Who would you think would provide a policy of better preventative healthcare for your children, a representative democracy advised by a panel of healthcare professionals and scientists, or your neighbours? Who would better understand a country's future energy requirements and the pros and cons of each time of fuel source - a representative democracy advised by a panel of engineers and scientists, or your neighbours? It works both ways.

The simple reason I would trust my neighbours more is the massive influence played by lobbyists. As an example, politicians were advised by "experts" that diesel cars were the answer to our environmental problems so that we were actively encouraged to buy them. It turns out now that this was complete BS.

[k_and_e]

	Quote:	Tom1234
	It was partly a trick question. The Swiss government have used representative democracy in the form of the National Council and Federal Assembly to decide ongoing Nuclear power policy. The people obviously cannot be trusted in such a difficult and complex decision. (although there is an initiative to decide on the length of operation of current nuclear power plants (who knew that Frau Mueller, the old lady next door who used to work at Migros was such an expert metallurgist?))

That's a nonsense argument.
People make complex choices in their personal life that have extreme long-term consequences (marriage, children, buying a house), so why shouldn't they be able to vote?

[st2lemans]

	Quote:	Tom1234
	The Swiss government have used representative democracy in the form of the National Council and Federal Assembly to decide ongoing Nuclear power policy.

And they totally bungled it.

Tom

[Tom1234]

	Quote:	Loz1983
	The simple reason I would trust my neighbours more is the massive influence played by lobbyists. As an example, politicians were advised by "experts" that diesel cars were the answer to our environmental problems so that we were actively encouraged to buy them. It turns out now that this was complete BS.

And you would have known better?

Before catalytic converters and vast improvements in small petrol engine efficiency, diesel engines, all things considered, were at the time, better overall.

	Quote:
	Does Frau Mueller need to be an expert metallurgist? I would have thought for the purposes of voting, both sides of the argument would boil down to a couple of bullet points on cost, alternatives and environmental impact...if you know more, great, if you don't, you just need the salient points/impacts.

So why didn't people get to vote on the more important issues surrounding nuclear power generation and not just a minor, pretty pointless detail?

	Quote:	k_and_e
	That's a nonsense argument. People make complex choices in their personal life that have extreme long-term consequences (marriage, children, buying a house), so why shouldn't they be able to vote?

Buying a house? Not quite the same argument as what, for example, to do with nuclear waste for the next one thousand years.

But yes, thanks for proving my point that people are more interested in factors that affect themselves directly rather than those that affect the nation's economic well being.

	Quote:
	What difference does it make.

It makes an enormous difference. Let's recap how our conversation went over the last couple of pages:

You got the wrong end of the stick about a comment I made about Mr Tusk and Mr Johnson, and accused me of being a Tory.

I corrected your mistake, so you asked if I was a Tory when I cast my vote in the referendum.

I took this to be an honest question, so I answered it at length and in good faith.

You responded with this:

	Quote:	Odile
	a bit late though, in this case. You and others did vote- for leave - and now have left - like Cameron- and without having to face the consequences.

Now, over the last two and a half years, I have heard this refrain from you again and again and again. Quite frankly, as a native born Englishman with only one passport, I find it bloody rude. How drunk on absinthe does a person have to be to imagine that any British citizen - regardless where he lives - is exempt from the "consequences" of his vote? It's an absurd claim - and all the more absurd when it comes from someone who has another passport she can run away with should the shit really hit the fan.

Odile, you are the one who has made this personal: you've been making it personal for years. You can hardly complain when someone throws it back in your face when you're so eager to dish it out.

And no, I won't answer your question about the union. You're just trying to start another fight, and I really can't be bothered with your tiresome and insincere bullshit any more. I'm sure StirB would be delighted to answer any sincere questions you might have about the Scottish people's right to self-determination.

[k_and_e]

	Quote:	Tom1234
	Buying a house? Not quite the same argument as what, for example, to do with nuclear waste for the next one thousand years.

Exactly. You prove my point. People see very well that nobody knows what to do with the nuclear waste and hence they vote against nuclear energy.

	Quote:	Tom1234
	So why didn't people get to vote on the more important issues surrounding nuclear power generation and not just a minor, pretty pointless detail?

I dunno, what's your point? People didn't gather signatures for that and take it to parliament?

	Quote:
	I'm sure StirB would be delighted to answer any sincere questions you might have about the Scottish people's right to self-determination.

Sure, go ahead.

[Tom1234]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	Exactly. You prove my point. People see very well that nobody knows what to do with the nuclear waste and hence they vote against nuclear energy.

They didn't get to vote for it or against it. That was decided by elected Politicians.

Anyway, you can't really have direct democracy without a house of elected politicians.

Sometimes there are issues which need decisions made on where the people have no idea there were issues in the first place.

	Quote:	Tom1234
	They didn't get to vote for it or against it. That was decided by elected Politicians. Anyway, you can't really have direct democracy without a house of elected politicians. Sometimes there are issues which need decisions made on where the people have no idea there were issues in the first place.

I'm lead to believe you can have a vote on whether Dougal's Breakfast should be called Susan on Tuesday afternoons if you gather enough signatures here...I guess they didn't bother with that procedure for whatever you are talking about voting on?

[Tom1234]

	Quote:
	I dunno,

I don't think it's my question to answer - I don't know either.

Someone Swiss should answer it.

	Quote:
	what's your point?

I've already answered that.

	Quote:	Tom1234
	I don't think it's my question to answer - I don't know either. Someone Swiss should answer it. I've already answered that.

Maybe quote my whole reply, selecting only two words is pretty poor form.

[Tom1234]

	Quote:
	Maybe quote my whole reply, selecting only two words is pretty poor form.

I think you'll find I replied before you edited your post to include the extra sentence.

So, not really poor form at all.

	Quote:	Tom1234
	I think you'll find I replied before you edited your post to include the extra sentence. So, not really poor form at all.

Considering I wrote a post in the mean time

Let's be generous and say it happened at the same time, you could have had two reply windows open. You can answer the point made now if you like.

[Tom1234]

	Quote:	st2lemans
	And they totally bungled it. Tom

So you voted the wrong people in.

[Tom1234]

	Quote:
	Considering I wrote a post in the mean time Let's be generous and say it happened at the same time, you could have had two reply windows open. You can answer the point made now if you like.

How gracious of you.

My point is that direct-democracy cannot, and does not, exist without an elected (or otherwise) group of representative politicians who will make some judgments on behalf of the people.

What I didn't know is why an initiative was raised on a relatively minor point of a major issue and why the major issue was decided by the government, and the government along.

And yes I appreciate it was 'technically' because an initiative wasn't raised. My question was why not? (Which is, as I wrote, something a Swiss person would probably need to answer).

	Quote:
	I'm lead to believe you can have a vote on whether Dougal's Breakfast should be called Susan on Tuesday afternoons if you gather enough signatures here...I guess they didn't bother with that procedure for whatever you are talking about voting on?

If parliament would make a decision on his name we can have a referendum for if that decision should be held up or be cancelled. Otherwise no you have no saying in such. (tho you are free to call him Susan from now on)

Anyone interested in the reasons the UK decided to quit the EU should watch the excellent BBC documentaries, Inside Europe: Ten Years of Turmoil. They have interviews with all the key players at the time. The first episode focused on Brexit, the second on the economic crises to have hit the EU in the last 10 years. The final episode, on tv tonight, focusses on the migrant crisis.

SPOILER ALERT: Sorry Odile, nothing about a message written on the side of a bus being to blame.

How does this work?

How does this work?