Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
I don't disagree. I think the only reason it has some small potential is that the U.K. government don't want it either. The EU are doing considerably more for us in negotiations than our own government are.
First the taxes have nothing to do in the question, all residents are subjected to taxes whether they are nationals or foreigners, so that point is weird, I do hope that you are not thinking about the "No taxation without representation" slogan. Secondly, as foreigners they are represented by their ambassadors and consuls and in Brussels they are indirectly represented by the country that host them.
Also being residents in the EU doesn't equate to being a citizen of the EU, it's not the EU that took the EU citizenship away from people, it's the British nation who voted for a withdrawal from the treaty that equated member states nationality to EU citizenship, when you cancel one, you cancel the other. It's unfortunate but that's how democracy works, the voting majority decided for you, if you really want to be a EU citizen, you can become a EU national.
Actually it was Verhofstadt who brought up the 'no taxation without representation' quote, not me. Representation references democratic representation, not representation by ambassadors or consols. It's a potential issue here, because of the involuntary removal of EU citizenship from people who have relocated into the EU under the (sometimes lifelong) understanding that they are EU citizens with full rights to democratic representation. For many of them, they weren't even allowed a vote on the issue of whether to lose that citizenship. That raises some serious concerns.
Actually I can't. I'll have been in France for 4 years and a bit years when Brexit arrives. It takes 5 years before you can apply for French citizenship, so thank you very fecking much Leave voters.
As to the wider point about what EU citizenship means, that's something you can't make a concrete statement about, because it hasn't yet been tested. If the proponents of the EU project are serious about the importance of citizenship, then it's not necessarily as simple as just 'but you can lose it involuntarily if enough of your fellow nationals want to throw it away'. There are major EU parliament conversations to be had on the issue and ECJ rulings to be made. Right now none of us know what will happen, because this is unprecedented.
Thats something British expats should forward to the 'getting back control' British government. Its not te EU's fault that Westminster couldn't be arsed to give you a meaningful voice. If the EU accepts that then it will open a whole new can of worms were immigrants from third countries would ask for pretty much the same. It will also mean that the UK government will have no incentive to provide EU immigrants any good terms at all as their own people are already automatically protected.
Im pretty much in the same situation. Under such circumstances I choose to show the middle finger and go back to my country. As said, EU rights are for EU members. Once the UK is not in the EU anymore then unless the UK and the EU agree about safeguarding such rights then that's pretty much game over.
I seriously can't see how the EU will accept its members to end up with less rights then UK citizens.
It wouldn't necessarily open any can of worms with new immigrants, because of the unique situation of UK citizens in the EU already having citizenship. It's about taking it away, not granting it in the first place.
The second point is the biggest problem, and yet another example of the UK government not giving a single feck about our needs. I completely agree that May and her henchmen would exploit the feck out of it.
That's easy for you to say, when you get to return to the EU. I do agree with your last point though, and I don't seriously expect it to happen, its just a wild card that is still vaguely possible if the stars align right.
I agree with you, I sincerely feel for the people who have been put in tough spot but that's how we organized our "democracies", the constitutional problems have been mentioned earlier, people might think that I was defending the status quo just because I'm pro EU but it was more due to all the issues that a leave vote would create without clearly pointing to an upside.
But that's not involuntarily, I see that side of the argument but it has a huge flaw, it basically means that the nation political decisions aren't linked to all nationals, no one would even try to have that argument if we were talking about legislative elections or a referendum about taxation whether you voted for it or not, the withdrawal from the EU is your decision as part of the British nation.
Also the precedents used by the complainants are not really convincing:
The UK won't be a member state after Brexit, so the Union citizenship can't be a fundamental status of british nationality.
If you actually applied that to Brexit, the very existence of it would be precluded and member states couldn't take any measure that would see them leave the EU. It's a bit of an ouroboros, the act that gives them their citizens rights is the very act that their nation withdrawn from.
To me if you use these precedents, you have three options. You either rule that Brexit is illegal, that EU citizenship is linked to your nation membership or that the EU is a country and EU citizens are a nation (which would go against the art.20 but it's one thing that I could see changed by a precedent).
The last point is important because it would have huge consequences on the actual rights of EU citizens.
Well it does open a can of worms for 3 reasons
a- Countries who might consider leaving the EU will see this as a way how to close borders on European people faces while still retaining their FOM rights. FOM is considered as a right for member states to enjoy. It wasn't meant as a tool for xenophobic countries to close the door to pesky foreigners while their own people can move around and do what it pleases.
b- Immigrants from Non EU countries will feel discriminated at. After 2019 why should a British taxpayer enjoy full rights in the EU while an American taxpayer can't?
c- FOM is one of the 4 freedoms. If one former member can enjoy one of the freedoms, on his own terms, without actually being in some sort of agreement with the EU then why should it loses the rest of the three freedoms? UK based companies may argue that they didn't voted for Brexit and that they moved into Britain mostly because it had access to the Single market. Why should that be stripped away from them?
As said I geniunely feel sorry for you but the EU is not the bad guy here. You should be consider if you're happy with a government who totally ignored your rights as a citizen to decide your country's fate and then vote adequately. British expats should return to blighty in droves and use their vote to make sure that Brexiteers will never see Westminster ever again. Same thing can be said to the Scottish and the Northern Irish who are being dragged out of Europe against their will.
Last edited:
Just stated a fact and you're never desperate to defend the eu right?
What fact? Your argument was 'race to the bottom', I pointed out that you are incorrect, there are other reasons for it moving so you then you come up with one example of one person who is earning a decent wedge out east as if that's the reality for everyone. You probably blame the EU when you stub your toe
Why on earth would I consider the EU the bad guy? I'm completely on the EU's side in this, and frankly my own government can go feck themselves. There is absolutely zero chance that I'd return to the UK just to try and vote out Brexiteers who it appears represent half my country. feck them, I'll hang on here until I can get citizenship if at all possible, and if not I'll find a new country to live in. If the UK want to close the doors to the world, then I have absolutely no intention of being on the inside when they do.
Apparently tech companies move just for low wages to Spain. It can't never happen that in Spain there is good tech companies or events because of the quality of the employers. Stanley is on the verge to say that Spain is a shithole like trump. Take a look at barcelona and how innovative it is and stop being a xenofobic topic lover. No wonder you are a pro-Brexit guy
2nd paragraph. Thats exactly their point isnt it? Where does it say in the treaty you cancel one you cancel the other? They may have chance on legal technicality.
Well, that your choice of course and in some ways it makes sense. Getting your EU passport is far more important than this. However, after that is achieved then I suggest you and all expats should give the idea of returning a thought. The way the government treated it by not allowing you the chance to vote for your future borders to a dictatorship. God knows what it will do next if its allowed to get away with it. The expat vote will tipple the balance between labour and the tories and it will give the message that there will be consequences for such nonsense.
As said I am geniunely sorry for the way you were treated and honestly I wouldn't mind if the EU gives expats FOM as long as the UK returns the favour. However, this will effect not just you but all UK citizens. There's something really wrong if Brexiteers get more FOM then we do.
I'm actually hoping for a fudge where it only includes UK citizens living within the EU to be honest. That still sucks mightily for the Remain voters in the UK, but as you say its never going to be just ok'd for all UK citizens.
I've asked my Spanish colleagues if they would like to move back and they all said "yes, but you cant get decent money"
One said it was a "corrupt shithole"
But no, it's me that's xfobic. UK is a shithole aswell.
I posted the two precedents that they are allegedly using here, it's not about what you think. Their problem is with Brexit itself, it is the measure that is preventing them from fully enjoying their current EU citizenship, if a judge agrees with that then Brexit becomes illegal from the EU POV, it also means that EU citizenship supersedes national citizenship.
And you don't need to mention any cancellation, the condition to be a EU citizen is to be a national of a member state.
Again, where does it say in the treaty that if a country leaves? Its not black and white.
I recently made a claim against my company for compensation I thought I was entitled to, the lawyers said they they could find nothing in the law that said I was or wasn't, it became a grey area. They had to refer to a previous case in the Netherlands that was similar and the person taking the company to court lost simply, cos there was nothing written on paper or in law.
Here there are no previous cases to refer to so it's going to be a technical decision or at worst, a legal opinion.
That's not what the initiative is about, they don't really have a lot of legal ground, what they want is convince a judge to support a EU regulation that would allow people to keep EU citizenship in spite of jus soli and jus sanguinis, because they know that at the moment EU citizenship is based on jus soli. They took the case to court in order to force the UK to reciprocate these rights because they think that Brexit is in a way a measure to reduce their rights which is against EU laws and principles.
If you look at the treaty, they don't really have a ground to keep their right but they can definitely convince someone to create the law, which is their goal.
Even being true, it did not happen in your mind that was not for cheap labour but because they have oustanding level workers. just cheap labour just cheap labour.
Yes, you are xenofobic with those comments
They dont need anyone to create a law, they will just argue 'where does it say that.......?'
ok, labour is cheaper in spain than NL, DE, DK, SE, etc. Fact, sorry dude
no, no sorry for facts
Sorry for not consider that is because they have good professionals
you are a xenofobic individual. Fact, and sorry not sorry dude
No they won't and that's not what they are doing either. Here you have the argument and train of thought of the lawyer, you can notice that all the cases include EU nationals, it's their rights that are protected not the ones of the people with them, in the case of minors the adults are given special rights in order to allow the EU national ( their children) to fully enjoy their rights.
The flaw is the nationality and like I said earlier they are aiming at the judge not the treaty.
Right ok, good post. Wish i knew what it meant.
Ok lets see how it pans out but i disagree. I cant be arsed to argue.
Who are you disagreeing with? Because if you looked at my posts I covered every basis.
yup the way you are is normal you can´t
There’s nothing xenophobic about the truth. Cheap labour is 99% of the reason why tech companies move.
In the UK most of the big tech distributors have all their warehouses in the north, and so does Amazon, not because of the level of professionals, that never entered their mind when making the decision, but because of the cheap labour and cheap real estate. They can afford to pay people less money because the cost of living is low and they can buy land and developments very cheap.
Apple, Microsoft and a host of other companies carried out most of their UK operations from Ireland, not because of the level of professionals but because of their taxation levels, cheap labour and real estate.
Dell moved their production from Ireland to Poland, again not because of the level of professionals but in their own words in favour of the cheaper workforce. Their moved their finance and accounting from UK to Czech Republic again not because of the level of professionals but because they could pay people to do the same job for half the money.
There are professionals doing the same job in every country to the same standard so the decision for corporations will come based on their goals and saving money is always top of the pile so there’s no reason to be offended.
The relevance here is doing the same job (so same quality, same level) cheaper. Cheaper labour but not made by dumb monkeys.
Also, why did not do it before? Also, why they don´t do it in cheaper countries. Definitely Spain has not the cheapest labour of the 27 (about the 10-15th of the union. Even Catalonia, Madrid and Basque country (where I suspect it will go) is above European average.
De comment it was a xenophobic cliché. period
Anyway I am out of last page posting conversation. Is a derail and I am not that offended in reality. Sometimes I loose myself trying to make a point that is not that important
Sorry for the xenofobic part @Stanley Road
Sorry for the xenofobic part @Stanley Road
It'd be fecking typical if they ended up being able to claim Brexit had been a success on the back of nothing more than sheer chance.
Thats the spirit. Every silver lining has a cloud.
If it convinces 17m people that their stupid decision was actually great, then yes thats a cloud. It encourages people to continue to ignore experts and think their own hunches and intuitions are a substitute for data and evidence. Especially as you can absolutely guarantee that even if the rest of Europe shows much bigger growth, that will be completely ignored.
What I found most interesting was his assertion that Brexit was not the most important factor concerning Britain's economic future.
How is Europe doing so well, I thought the EU killed growth?
Facts and brexitremism don't mix well, that's how.
To be fair the global economy is usually going to be the main consideration.
It's coming from a lower base, having had a longer and deeper recession, with an ECB policy misstep thrown in along the way.
I'm being facetious. The EU as a whole shouldn't be compared to other nations economically as every nation within has its own economic policies