Even though we voted for it, a Brexit won't happen in the end. Here's why

[Caps]

Well thats funny coming from you as you aint answered mine, did you vote for Juncker and the rest of the Presidents? I will answer it for you..NO you didn't

Are you answering your own questions now? ...rofl!

I've already answered your points ...you however you have failed to address any of mine, because you can't!

give them again, and hopefully you will listen this time, and if you read it properly you would see I answered two

[ilostmypassword]

Well thats funny coming from you as you aint answered mine, did you vote for Juncker and the rest of the Presidents? I will answer it for you..NO you didn't

Are you answering your own questions now? ...rofl!

I've already answered your points ...you however you have failed to address any of mine, because you can't!

Give up on him. He's hopeless. He clearly doesn't understand the Parliamentary system.

[Caps]

Well thats funny coming from you as you aint answered mine, did you vote for Juncker and the rest of the Presidents? I will answer it for you..NO you didn't

Are you answering your own questions now? ...rofl!

I've already answered your points ...you however you have failed to address any of mine, because you can't!

Give up on him. He's hopeless. He clearly doesn't understand the Parliamentary system.

and why not bright spark

[HappyDazed]

Well thats funny coming from you as you aint answered mine, did you vote for Juncker and the rest of the Presidents? I will answer it for you..NO you didn't

Are you answering your own questions now? ...rofl!

I've already answered your points ...you however you have failed to address any of mine, because you can't!

give them again,

Scroll back and quote, like you should have done the first time ..instead of throwing your toys out the pram!

[Caps]

I have looked and am satisfied i answered the points I came in on, if your not satisfied I can get the number of the Samaritans....they might give a to55...and if you think thats throwing toys then you have lead a sheltered life

[ilostmypassword]

Well thats funny coming from you as you aint answered mine, did you vote for Juncker and the rest of the Presidents? I will answer it for you..NO you didn't

Are you answering your own questions now? ...rofl!

I've already answered your points ...you however you have failed to address any of mine, because you can't!

Give up on him. He's hopeless. He clearly doesn't understand the Parliamentary system.

and why not bright spark

Because the voters don't get to select the PM.

[MissAndry]

Well thats funny coming from you as you aint answered mine, did you vote for Juncker and the rest of the Presidents? I will answer it for you..NO you didn't

Are you answering your own questions now? ...rofl!

I've already answered your points ...you however you have failed to address any of mine, because you can't!

Once again Junker etc were nominated by elected British MEP's.

You just don't understand how the EU works ...simples!

I don't see any evidence that Junker was elected (or proposed, or nominated) by any British MEPs.

It was a secret ballot. 420 votes for, 250 against, 50 didn't vote.

For all we know the British MEPs all voted against him.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20140714IPR52341/Parliament-elects-Jean-Claude-Juncker-as-Commission-President

Edited June 29, 2016 by MissAndry

[mercman24]

i think a lot of countries remaining in the EU are secretly pooing themselves but don't want to come right out and say so, the UK brings a lot to the EU table and they know darn well it will effect these countries big time.

[ilostmypassword]

Well thats funny coming from you as you aint answered mine, did you vote for Juncker and the rest of the Presidents? I will answer it for you..NO you didn't

Are you answering your own questions now? ...rofl!

I've already answered your points ...you however you have failed to address any of mine, because you can't!

Once again Junker etc were nominated by elected British MEP's.

You just don't understand how the EU works ...simples!

I don't see any evidence that Junker was elected (or proposed, or nominated) by any British MEPs.

It was a secret ballot. 420 votes for, 250 against, 50 didn't vote.

For all we know the British MEPs all voted against him.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20140714IPR52341/Parliament-elects-Jean-Claude-Juncker-as-Commission-President

And that makes it undemocratic?

[Thaiwine]

And this is why you cannot run a country with town-hall politics, f###ing wan##rs. A representative democracy means just that, you elect people who are specialists. When they abrogate that responsibility, and return to the people, you have a big problem.

The only thing the people who get voted for are specalised in is deceit, the civil servants are the guys who know what they are doing (supposedly) the boys in the suits are all mouth and no trousers.

[fasteddie]

Other European countries are seeing it in simple terms.

You voted to leave, so you will leave.

There is no mechanism to reverse this vote and another referendum is out of the question.

The UK is leaving (unfortunately).

Not so, it has to be voted on in parliament.

[Berty100]

Worth a read.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/23/what-happens-after-a-leave-victory/

Some have suggested that another referendum could be held on the terms of the withdrawal deal itself. But it is not clear this can work in practice. One idea is a vote on whether to accept the deal or decide not to leave the EU after all. But there is actually no legal provision for reversing the original declaration of intent to leave. While some fudge might well be found, it would probably be at the cost of major concessions to the interests of other EU countries. Another idea is a vote to accept the withdrawal terms on offer or go back in search of better terms. But here we face the two-year deadline: finding ourselves out of the EU without a deal would be very undesirable.

[Thaiwine]

opps

.

Edited June 29, 2016 by Thaiwine

[mommysboy]

My understanding is that a lot of people voted to leave based on xenophobia and racism. So the day after their "victory" they realized the Poles and the Muslims, etc. aren't going anywhere. Oops!

Then you clearly have no understanding whatsoever.

I saw an exit poll graphic that stated the largest concern of those that voted Leave was .... Immigration..... i.e. too many foreigners..... now some of those that voted to leave based on Immigration might have voted that way because they love "foreigners".... but I have a feeling... not many.... Whether that is xenophobia or racism ... I guess it is all up to the person interpreting why Immigration was such an important issue.

We are one of the most cosmopolitan countries in the world. If you go some areas in Britain particularly northern towns unfortunately job loss has coincided with widespread immigration. But it's not just immigration as such, it's the social welfare cost too. Under EU rules anyone from EU can come to Britain and claim benefits. Although there are rules that prevent people using the NHS, they are not usually enforced as we are a compassionate nation these days.

Yoiu do not live in UK. You do not know the situation. Most of the more developed nations have expressed the same concern. If it offends you then club together and pay the bills. Then there will be no problem.

[Berty100]

My understanding is that a lot of people voted to leave based on xenophobia and racism. So the day after their "victory" they realized the Poles and the Muslims, etc. aren't going anywhere. Oops!

Then you clearly have no understanding whatsoever.

I saw an exit poll graphic that stated the largest concern of those that voted Leave was .... Immigration..... i.e. too many foreigners..... now some of those that voted to leave based on Immigration might have voted that way because they love "foreigners".... but I have a feeling... not many.... Whether that is xenophobia or racism ... I guess it is all up to the person interpreting why Immigration was such an important issue.

We are one of the most cosmopolitan countries in the world. If you go some areas in Britain particularly northern towns unfortunately job loss has coincided with widespread immigration. But it's not just immigration as such, it's the social welfare cost too. Under EU rules anyone from EU can come to Britain and claim benefits. Although there are rules that prevent people using the NHS, they are not usually enforced as we are a compassionate nation these days.

Yoiu do not live in UK. You do not know the situation. Most of the more developed nations have expressed the same concern. If it offends you then club together and pay the bills. Then there will be no problem.

And look what's on the way now.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/divisiong-confusion-eu-rethinks-future-without-britain-070306591--finance.html

European Union leaders spelled out stark conditions for a new relationship with a departing Britain on Wednesday, warning that if British business wants to keep access to Europe’s single market, the country must accept European workers, too.

<snip>

They met without British Prime Minister David Cameron, who left Brussels on Tuesday night without any clear divorce plan, fending off pressure for a quick exit and punting the complex departure negotiations to his successor. In Britain, nominations opened Wednesday for a new Conservative leader to replace him after his devastating political miscalculation in calling last week’s referendum.

Other EU leaders warned the U.K. that if it wants to continue to enjoy the seamless single market after its departure, it would also have to accept that EU citizens can continue to enter Britain. That’s the crux of the current tensions: Britain’s “leave” vote hinged on concerns about migration from poorer EU countries.

[ilostmypassword]

My understanding is that a lot of people voted to leave based on xenophobia and racism. So the day after their "victory" they realized the Poles and the Muslims, etc. aren't going anywhere. Oops!

Then you clearly have no understanding whatsoever.

I saw an exit poll graphic that stated the largest concern of those that voted Leave was .... Immigration..... i.e. too many foreigners..... now some of those that voted to leave based on Immigration might have voted that way because they love "foreigners".... but I have a feeling... not many.... Whether that is xenophobia or racism ... I guess it is all up to the person interpreting why Immigration was such an important issue.

We are one of the most cosmopolitan countries in the world. If you go some areas in Britain particularly northern towns unfortunately job loss has coincided with widespread immigration. But it's not just immigration as such, it's the social welfare cost too. Under EU rules anyone from EU can come to Britain and claim benefits. Although there are rules that prevent people using the NHS, they are not usually enforced as we are a compassionate nation these days.

Yoiu do not live in UK. You do not know the situation. Most of the more developed nations have expressed the same concern. If it offends you then club together and pay the bills. Then there will be no problem.

First off, you have to distinguish between EU immigrants and immigrants from elsewhere. The UK is not going to get the EU to budge on the freedom of movement of labor. As for immigrants from commonwealth countries and elsewhere, the EU has no say over that at all. Nor can it compel the UK to take in refugees. In fact, as regards refugees, Brexit is probably going to make the situations worse for the UK

"A bilateral agreement with France, which allows Britain to implement border controls on French soil, has helped prevent thousands of migrants and refugees camped in Calais from reaching UK shores. Although the accord was struck independently of the EU, French politicians have in recent days described it as politically untenable in the wake of the referendum outcome."

https://www.irinnews.org/analysis/2016/06/27/what-does-brexit-mean-refugees

Edited June 29, 2016 by ilostmypassword

[mommysboy]

Immigration will not stop if we sign up to the Free Trade Deal if offered. EU has been quite unequivocal about that. It's not new news. So I imagine there will be no trade deal. Obviously that is sad for us, as it is for EU, but trade tariffs are quite low and more than offset by even a small drop in the pounds value. As for the EU, of course, when they impose tariffs we will presumably do likewise. it's not healthy and will damage both parties.

I don't think UK is after an end to immigration. Just some control over it. Nearly all countries simply want to govern this aspect surely. It's a bit rich for a Canadian, or American, Australian, or Kiwi, toi name a few to criticise UK for something they would not dare do without.

If you are a Canadian say, would you sign up to a deal that mandated you to open your borders?

Britain tried to negotiate on behalf of the rest of EU, and has the support of many countries. Merkel herself agreed there was a valid case. Over the years, Britain predicted the folly of the single currency, and fixed rate fiscal policy. Both have been a disaster.

Edited June 29, 2016 by mommysboy

[MJP]

Immigration will not stop if we sign up to the Free Trade Deal if offered. EU has been quite unequivocal about that. It's not new news. So I imagine there will be no trade deal. Obviously that is sad for us, as it is for EU, but trade tariffs are quite low and more than offset by even a small drop in the pounds value. As for the EU, of course, when they impose tariffs we will presumably do likewise. it's not healthy and will damage both parties.

I don't think UK is after an end to immigration. Just some control over it. Nearly all countries simply want to govern this aspect surely. It's a bit rich for a Canadian, or American, Australian, or Kiwi, toi name a few to criticise UK for something they would not dare do without.

If you are a Canadian say, would you sign up to a deal that mandated you to open your borders?

Britain tried to negotiate on behalf of the rest of EU, and has the support of many countries. Merkel herself agreed there was a valid case. Over the years, Britain predicted the folly of the single currency, and fixed rate fiscal policy. Both have been a disaster.

Spot on a ever. Yes, it's a bit rich for Aussie's etc to criticise the UK's situation.

[ilostmypassword]

Immigration will not stop if we sign up to the Free Trade Deal if offered. EU has been quite unequivocal about that. It's not new news. So I imagine there will be no trade deal. Obviously that is sad for us, as it is for EU, but trade tariffs are quite low and more than offset by even a small drop in the pounds value. As for the EU, of course, when they impose tariffs we will presumably do likewise. it's not healthy and will damage both parties.

I don't think UK is after an end to immigration. Just some control over it. Nearly all countries simply want to govern this aspect surely. It's a bit rich for a Canadian, or American, Australian, or Kiwi, toi name a few to criticise UK for something they would not dare do without.

If you are a Canadian say, would you sign up to a deal that mandated you to open your borders?

Britain tried to negotiate on behalf of the rest of EU, and has the support of many countries. Merkel herself agreed there was a valid case. Over the years, Britain predicted the folly of the single currency, and fixed rate fiscal policy. Both have been a disaster.

The Euro is another matter entirely and yes, it is a slow motion disaster that may doom the EU. But the thing is, the UK never adopted the Euro. So what's your point?

As for the free movement of labor, the Leave leaders were promising that they could negotiate a favorable deal with the EU. Never seemed likely and it still doesn't.

[mommysboy]

Other European countries are seeing it in simple terms.

You voted to leave, so you will leave.

There is no mechanism to reverse this vote and another referendum is out of the question.

The UK is leaving (unfortunately).

Not so, it has to be voted on in parliament.

The enactment may have to be voted for in parliament. Generally anything involving constitutional change can only be introduce by an Act of Parliament. But it is not clear reagrding the issuance of this notice.

Yes, finally UK Parliament coulkd, and probably would block the legislation, but by then EU would have terminated the deal with UK. In other words it would be all over.

[Thaiwine]

But then on the bright side I have just seen this

http://heatst.com/uk/11-countries-gearing-up-to-strike-trade-deals-with-britain/

See we don't need the EU it's only about one week

[mommysboy]

Immigration will not stop if we sign up to the Free Trade Deal if offered. EU has been quite unequivocal about that. It's not new news. So I imagine there will be no trade deal. Obviously that is sad for us, as it is for EU, but trade tariffs are quite low and more than offset by even a small drop in the pounds value. As for the EU, of course, when they impose tariffs we will presumably do likewise. it's not healthy and will damage both parties.

I don't think UK is after an end to immigration. Just some control over it. Nearly all countries simply want to govern this aspect surely. It's a bit rich for a Canadian, or American, Australian, or Kiwi, toi name a few to criticise UK for something they would not dare do without.

If you are a Canadian say, would you sign up to a deal that mandated you to open your borders?

Britain tried to negotiate on behalf of the rest of EU, and has the support of many countries. Merkel herself agreed there was a valid case. Over the years, Britain predicted the folly of the single currency, and fixed rate fiscal policy. Both have been a disaster.

The Euro is another matter entirely and yes, it is a slow motion disaster that may doom the EU. But the thing is, the UK never adopted the Euro. So what's your point?

As for the free movement of labor, the Leave leaders were promising that they could negotiate a favorable deal with the EU. Never seemed likely and it still doesn't.

There are two points:

1. The single currency has been one of a number of unmitigated disasters that has led EU to stagnate, The point being UK warned against this and Brussels did not listen.

2. Though we do not have the Euro, the EU's economic situation has impacted on groeth throughout Europe. We are all interdeopendent you see. Most people for some reason assume EU is doing fine, and paint a rosy picture of the future. That simply does not stand. In August it will likely be facing another looming debt crisis.

As regarding what Leave promised (and I was Remain): A free trade deal without commitments to open border movement was never on the cards. In short they lied, and people were stupid enough to believe them. The EU does not need UK that is a myth, though it will be economically impacted, as will the UK more so.

Edited June 29, 2016 by mommysboy

[MJP]

But then on the bright side I have just seen this

http://heatst.com/uk/11-countries-gearing-up-to-strike-trade-deals-with-britain/

See we don't need the EU it's only about one week

Brexit is a golden opportunity for Blighty.

We now bow our heads in prayer that the UK has the politicians and civil servants capable of NOT screwing this opportunity up. Confidence low thus far.

[Jumper]

In my years here I rarely post.

I'm an American so it can be debated if I have a horse in this race.

Maybe the Brits have just voted themselves into recession. That's to be seen, but I wonder if anyone here understands the EU concept of Qualified Majority Voting? If so, maybe you can explain it ti the masses.

For sure the Brits have just shot themselves in the foot in near term economic terms, but maybe that was better than shooting themselves in the head in terms of the long term solution.

In my mind there is not a simple answer to this complex question. For sure the Brits economically would be better off (now) staying in the union, but at what long term cost? The loss of sovereignty over their own country?

Again, speaking as an American, I would pay the price to throw off the yoke of debilitating regulation so that my progeny might live free of it.

My support to David Cameron. He is a leader the west needs more of.

[mommysboy]

Regarding the need for a free trade deal. I'm afraid that's where 'Remain' have been a bit economical with the truth. It is not essential, only preferable. Not having a free trade deal does not mean UK can not trade with the EU. China does not have one, nor Canada, Australia or any number of countries. They simply trade by goodwill, and WTO regulations. EU tariffs are actually quite low. China seems to have done quite well.

Also, you have to bear in mind that what EU does to UK, UK would undoubtedly do to EU, and of course nobody wants a war anyway. Commerce just want to get on with commerce as unhindered as possible, turn a profit, and do it again. Also there are at least two parties in any business deal and both need to survive. If one can't make a profit, then the other one has a problem too. That's a bit simplistic but I am just making a 'brass tacks' point.

Can I give the example of the car industry. Lets not do figures. I am not so sure and people on this thread are very rapacious about such things. I'm trying just to get the principle across why it is important for both parties to come to an amicable settlement, because at the end of the day all governments are accountable to the electorate and big business.

Britain imports a significant number of cars from Germany. If UK imposes a tariff on Germany, then it figures Germany will sell less. Germany also has a significant presence in the very big UK car manufacturing sector. If Germany imposes a tax on UK exports then German car makers in UK get hit. So already we can see that BMW are not going to be happy getting clobbered with 2 sets of taxes because a couple of governments are acting like spoilt brats, nor presumably the workers who lose their jobs.

Now I'm sure it is not so simple as this acrooss the board but it serves as an example that we can all understand.

Also I think I'm in the grid, but may be way off. Nobody else has taken the time to post better put it that way. But like all of us, I would welcome further education. but lets keep it general. It serves no interest to dive in to complex matters that none of us quite understand yet.

Also, if an argument is to be cogent, it must be free from obvious bias,ie,' I assert therefore it is', as someone has wryly observed.

[mommysboy]

Double posting- I deleted

Edited June 29, 2016 by mommysboy

[MJP]

In my years here I rarely post.

I'm an American so it can be debated if I have a horse in this race.

Maybe the Brits have just voted themselves into recession. That's to be seen, but I wonder if anyone here understands the EU concept of Qualified Majority Voting? If so, maybe you can explain it ti the masses.

For sure the Brits have just shot themselves in the foot in near term economic terms, but maybe that was better than shooting themselves in the head in terms of the long term solution.

In my mind there is not a simple answer to this complex question. For sure the Brits economically would be better off (now) staying in the union, but at what long term cost? The loss of sovereignty over their own country?

Again, speaking as an American, I would pay the price to throw off the yoke of debilitating regulation so that my progeny might live free of it.

My support to David Cameron. He is a leader the west needs more of.

We regularly get recessions, in fact many people haven't come out of the last one. It is time to think long term and the Soviet styled EU was certainly not the future for 'ol Blighty.

Who we need now is the love child of Ludwig Erhard and Sir John Cowperthwaite to sort it out.

Edited June 29, 2016 by MJP

[Gweiloman]

Regarding the need for a free trade deal. I'm afraid that's where 'Remain' have been a bit economical with the truth. It is not essential, only preferable. Not having a free trade deal does not mean UK can not trade with the EU. China does not have one, nor Canada, Australia or any number of countries. They simply trade by goodwill, and WTO regulations. EU tariffs are actually quite low. China seems to have done quite well.

Also, you have to bear in mind that what EU does to UK, UK would undoubtedly do to EU, and of course nobody wants a war anyway. Commerce just want to get on with commerce as unhindered as possible, turn a profit, and do it again. Also there are at least two parties in any business deal and both need to survive. If one can't make a profit, then the other one has a problem too. That's a bit simplistic but I am just making a 'brass tacks' point.

Can I give the example of the car industry. Lets not do figures. I am not so sure and people on this thread are very rapacious about such things. I'm trying just to get the principle across why it is important for both parties to come to an amicable settlement, because at the end of the day all governments are accountable to the electorate and big business.

Britain imports a significant number of cars from Germany. If UK imposes a tariff on Germany, then it figures Germany will sell less. Germany also has a significant presence in the very big UK car manufacturing sector. If Germany imposes a tax on UK exports then German car makers in UK get hit. So already we can see that BMW are not going to be happy getting clobbered with 2 sets of taxes because a couple of governments are acting like spoilt brats, nor presumably the workers who lose their jobs.

Now I'm sure it is not so simple as this acrooss the board but it serves as an example that we can all understand.

Also I think I'm in the grid, but may be way off. Nobody else has taken the time to post better put it that way. But like all of us, I would welcome further education. but lets keep it general. It serves no interest to dive in to complex matters that none of us quite understand yet.

Also, if an argument is to be cogent, it must be free from obvious bias,ie,' I assert therefore it is', as someone has wryly observed.

"Britain imports a significant number of cars from Germany. If UK imposes a tariff on Germany, then it figures Germany will sell less. Germany also has a significant presence in the very big UK car manufacturing sector. If Germany imposes a tax on UK exports then German car makers in UK get hit. So already we can see that BMW are not going to be happy getting clobbered with 2 sets of taxes because a couple of governments are acting like spoilt brats, nor presumably the workers who lose their jobs.

Now I'm sure it is not so simple as this acrooss the board but it serves as an example that we can all understand."

Actually, it IS as simple as that. If the EU imposes a tariff on the parts that the UK manufactures that the German car manufacturers need, this will make the cost of the car higher (unless the German car manufacturers can source these parts from elsewhere within the EU). This increased cost will then be reflected in the sales price of the car. After that, if the UK imposes a tariff on the now more expensive car from Germany, the demand will naturally decrease (unless you don't believe in the supply and demand model of economics).

Therefore, it is NOT in the interests of both parties to have to pay high tariffs. And this is the bluff that the EU (and the Remainers) is/are trying to play. When the UK leaves the common (EU) market, it won't be business as usual but it will still be business. The manufacturers might well have to absorb the tariffs to continue selling cars. This is not rocket science. I'm in the business of sending tourists from Asia to Europe. Cost increases quite often come by with no prior notice (for eg, city entrance taxes, hotel taxes, VAT increases etc). If I can then pass these increases to the customer I do. But if my competitors decide to absorb these costs, then I have to follow suit.

Edited June 29, 2016 by Gweiloman

[Jumper]

In my years here I rarely post.

I'm an American so it can be debated if I have a horse in this race.

Maybe the Brits have just voted themselves into recession. That's to be seen, but I wonder if anyone here understands the EU concept of Qualified Majority Voting? If so, maybe you can explain it ti the masses.

For sure the Brits have just shot themselves in the foot in near term economic terms, but maybe that was better than shooting themselves in the head in terms of the long term solution.

In my mind there is not a simple answer to this complex question. For sure the Brits economically would be better off (now) staying in the union, but at what long term cost? The loss of sovereignty over their own country?

Again, speaking as an American, I would pay the price to throw off the yoke of debilitating regulation so that my progeny might live free of it.

My support to David Cameron. He is a leader the west needs more of.

We regularly get recessions, in fact many people haven't come out of the last one. It is time to think long term and the Soviet styled EU was certainly not the future for 'ol Blighty.

Who we need now is the love child of Ludwig Erhard and Sir John Cowperthwaite to sort it out.

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong. - H.L. Mencken.

To me an understanding of the EU concept of Qualified Majority Voting is where the EU really went off the rails.

If that doesn't do it for you google the EU positions on Common and Foreign Security Policy and Justice and Home Affairs.

The EU is a grand experiment in Europe that we all hope will succeed, but in it's current incarnation t's a train wreck waiting to happen.

[MJP]

In my years here I rarely post.

I'm an American so it can be debated if I have a horse in this race.

Maybe the Brits have just voted themselves into recession. That's to be seen, but I wonder if anyone here understands the EU concept of Qualified Majority Voting? If so, maybe you can explain it ti the masses.

For sure the Brits have just shot themselves in the foot in near term economic terms, but maybe that was better than shooting themselves in the head in terms of the long term solution.

In my mind there is not a simple answer to this complex question. For sure the Brits economically would be better off (now) staying in the union, but at what long term cost? The loss of sovereignty over their own country?

Again, speaking as an American, I would pay the price to throw off the yoke of debilitating regulation so that my progeny might live free of it.

My support to David Cameron. He is a leader the west needs more of.

We regularly get recessions, in fact many people haven't come out of the last one. It is time to think long term and the Soviet styled EU was certainly not the future for 'ol Blighty.

Who we need now is the love child of Ludwig Erhard and Sir John Cowperthwaite to sort it out.

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong. - H.L. Mencken.

To me an understanding of the EU concept of Qualified Majority Voting is where the EU really went off the rails.

If that doesn't do it for you google the EU positions on Common and Foreign Security Policy and Justice and Home Affairs.

The EU is a grand experiment in Europe that we all hope will succeed, but in it's current incarnation t's a train wreck waiting to happen.

This is the main reason (actually the only reason) I voted leave . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2-cQ8TfU4A

Stuffy old goats, but the message isn't wrong.