UK Tech Sector Reacts To Brexit: Some Anticipate Slow Down, Some Contemplate Relocation

In the aftermath of the United Kingdom voting to leave the European Union, UK's technology industry is reassessing its position, with many of them considering moving to a continental location. According to reports, Samsung, LG, and Acer have noted that the UK leaving the EU will affect their operations. From a BBC report:As news of Brexit broke, tech firms including BT, TalkTalk and software firm Sage reported share price falls. [...] "I have concerns that the local market might slow down," said Drew Benvie, founder of London-based digital agency Battenhall. From a report on The Guardian:Britain's financial technology sector is particularly hard-hit, with the prospect of losing access to European markets an unappealing one. "Fintech" has long been one of the UK's most promising growth areas, in part due to London's position as the financial capital of Europe. [...] Not one of the 14 billion-dollar tech firms based in the UK the Guardian asked said leaving the EU would be good for their business.Toby Coppel, the co-founder of venture capital firm Mosaic, said: "The next entrepreneur who's 22 years old, graduating from a technical university in Germany may, instead of moving to London to do their Fintech startup, decide to go to Berlin instead. I think that's one of the biggest concerns I have about the trajectory of the London technical ecosystem."

Comments

Re:Don't Panic

[Ash-Fox]

"The next entrepreneur who's 22 years old, graduating from a technical university in Germany may, instead of moving to London to do their Fintech startup, decide to go to Berlin instead. I think that's one of the biggest concerns I have about the trajectory of the London technical ecosystem."

Can we get stats on the last few years of 22 year old entrepreneurs from Germany that did a fintech startup in London?

Re:Don't Panic

[NotInHere]

Well yeah there are lots of ideas in the room. One is what maybe lots of the leave campaigners would like to see, is even more extra regulations only for the UK. Basically it gets all the profits without having to give its own share. Maybe even like the TAFTA where US companies can send their genetically modified crops to the EU? I don't know that this is something the EU will want to do.

Some things are really sure though:

1. The UK will need *some* countries to trade with. If its not the EU, then maybe some other country will do.
2. If the UK is given lots of extra regulations, other countries will demand this as well, like norway, or even current EU members. In fact already now there are demands coming in from current EU members.
3. The EU is in a much better position than the UK, simply due to sheer size. Threatening with an exit is always a good tool, but once you are out you have nothing to threaten with anymore, but still all the same problems.

Well lets see what the UK will do with that extra money they don't send to the EU anymore. Anyway, if they were actually paying what other countries of their size do, they would have spared lots more, but as they already had extra regulations within the EU, the part they have available now is much smaller.

Re:Don't Panic

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly! They don't make any money if you don't either keep watching or refreshing the page to see if the WW3 starts over some kids throwing eggs. The DA's are in on it too and those kids need 3-4 felonies pinned on them, so you'll always remember that DA's name.

Re:Don't Panic

[Kohath]

Because the same rich European elites who benefit from the pre-Brexit conditions will stand to benefit from those conditions mostly continuing. And they're the people in charge of the EU.

Re:Don't Panic

[unimacs]

I agree it is really early. However, it would seem to me that the EU has a built-in incentive to isolate the UK. If you can leave the EU without meaningful consequences, then the EU will collapse as other member countries start to bail.

Re:Don't Panic

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember Norway is more or less an EU member, shares all the benefits and pays in but has no political power in EU. Benefits cost the same whether you are a member or not. UK was never a "full member", as UK had a lot of exemptions from rules and regulations while at the same time wielding political power. Power they wielded to make a mess of EU as possible.

Not having UK in EU might be a good thing, at least we'd have a lot less of bitching and bickering over nothing. The most stupid about this, is that if UK wants the benefits they will pay now full price as they will not have any political power in EU to reduce their members fee.

Considering our office in Newcastle...

[Anonymous Coward]

has zero people born in the UK and about sixty people born in the EU, this is going to hurt. The UK economy is driven by people that are not from the UK, even if the vast majority of the the people driving the economy aren't from the UK.

Re:Considering our office in Newcastle...

[ledow]

I can't share the exact quote with you, but my girlfriend is a Dr in a London hospital department. Her lab basically tells you if you have cancer if you are one of the millions of people who live in or around London.

In her department, which requires high-end medically-skilled professionals, her boss posted after Brexit. The basic gist was "Don't worry, everyone, your cancer diagnosis will still be safe in the hands of our department consisting almost entirely of Spanish, Italian, German, French, Polish, Greek, ...... personnel for the time being".

Throughout the NHS the picture is the same. Majority EU and then Non-UK workers. Or universities. Almost all the major universities have majority non-UK lecturers and professors (which actually means something here - a professor is a much higher grade of personnel than in the US, you'll be incredibly lucky to meet a professor outside of academia).

And it's not just as simple as "things will carry on". My girlfriend came over as an EU citizen. She has "leave to remain", so she can stay and live and work in the UK. But to get permanent citizenship, she would have to marry or go through a lengthy immigration process (including a stupid test asking questions about kings and queens that I, as a natural Brit, would be baffled by). Coming out of the EU could revoke that leave to remain. Nobody's sure at the moment and we only have two years to work that out.

If that's taken away, or the paperwork involved in heinous, or even if the process that's required is overwhelmed by all the EU people working in the UK suddenly applying to stay here, then you have quite a situation that is an awful lot of effort to sit through. And they are already disgusted and feeling unwanted because of the Brexit vote.

It's like a state voting itself out of the USA. Imagine how you'd feel as the out-of-state worker who's just been voted against, made to feel unwelcome, contemplating being in a "foreign" state, and may have to jump through all kinds of hoops to carry on your normal life that you've had for YEARS.

We're going to lose an awful lot of talent, from students coming to our universities to the lecturers teaching them, from the waitresses on minimum wages to the doctors earning a fortune. And there's no way that it will become a zero-paperwork process for any of the above, which just adds costs and hassle.

We're now basically a foreign country. If you're American you may not understand that - do you have automatic right to live in any other country in the world? Because before the vote, we have had that guaranteed for decades. We can just up sticks, go to Sweden and start up a life like anyone else, without even bothering with paperwork or visas.

We've (potentially) just thrown that in the bin, which means a lot of people who found that convenient and wanted to live in Britain are now unwelcome and may be forced to leave, or put under such scrutiny that they decide to go to one of the other dozens of countries just 30 miles away, where they don't have any of that hassle.

Watch the NHS, education, and the large businesses. They're all about to suffer, even if they don't immediately collapse.

Re:Considering our office in Newcastle...

[blind biker]

I can't share the exact quote with you, but my girlfriend is a Dr in a London hospital department. Her lab basically tells you if you have cancer if you are one of the millions of people who live in or around London.

In her department, which requires high-end medically-skilled professionals, her boss posted after Brexit. The basic gist was "Don't worry, everyone, your cancer diagnosis will still be safe in the hands of our department consisting almost entirely of Spanish, Italian, German, French, Polish, Greek, ...... personnel for the time being".

This is proof of class warfare at its best (worst): the financial elites have figured out that paying for highly skilled personnel educated in Britain was too expensive. It is much better to import highly educated but cheaper labor from abroad. Incidentally, Britain used to have effectively free higher education a couple of decades ago, but the same financial elites (who hold the real power, including political) decided that such social benefits are now unnecessary, since labor from abroad comes pre-educated.

Re:Considering our office in Newcastle...

[ledow]

And yet the population of Britain hasn't grown that much past projections since 1970.

Under EU employment law, we actually DO discriminate on language skills. That's another "absolute bollocks" rumour. Doctors and qualified medical professionals - and especially those from outside the UK - are required to sit tests or demonstrate competency on this exact requirement, in fact. The EU does not affect that at all, and certainly the French would be up in arms against such a law first as they are much more protective of their language.

Agreed on the welfare support, however, but that's not a problem that Brexit fixes. As you say, many other EU countries do just what we need to do.

But if a migrant worker can do a qualified or professional job, pay tax, get paid and still have enough send enough home, who the hell are we to get in their way or say they shouldn't be in the country? Freeloaders, yes, but again, why are "British" freeloaders okay but "EU" ones not? Get rid of them all by changing welfare criteria.

It's possible the UK will recognise my girlfriend as a citizen, but it's by no means guaranteed. The guarantee that existed as an EU member is gone. That affects career decisions. If she gets offered a job back in her home country, it's going to be taken account of. The problem, again, is not the EU or lack of it. It's the complete lack of any official statement, or clear process, to solve the problem.

You could announce THIS SECOND that all current workers in certain sectors would be given permanent leave to remain. But they haven't. Such confusion is going to lose workers as offers change each side of the Channel in the next two years.

Delay, confusion and uncertainty is what we've voted for, over stability, clarity and ALWAYS still having the option of negotiating or leaving at a later date. Exiting is - for the next generation at least - a one way trip.

Re:Considering our office in Newcastle...

[Cederic]

And yet the population of Britain hasn't grown that much past projections since 1970.

"It is estimated that net migration plus births to foreign-born parents has accounted for 85% of UK population growth since 2000." - http://www.migrationwatchuk.or...

Projections or not, migration is very much responsible for population growth, and people just don't want to live in a sardine can packed tight against their neighbours.

Get rid of them all by changing welfare criteria.

Erm. That's what Cameron tried to do earlier this year, and the EU said 'no'.

Re:Don't Panic

[byornski]

They lost Ireland years ago. If you mean Northern Ireland, there is little impetus there to change what people are seeing as peace. Factions on the far sides might want to play it that way but it's basically not going to happen. The south was/is in a financial crisis that was solved by the UK saying we'll bankroll them and their own austerity. Norway is not in the Euro but has accepted the schengen agreement for free travel. They do not pay so much in but they get more say on domestic rights.

Re: Congrats to Britain

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean England, which is the only piece of the UK which will be out of the EU in five years. Scotland will be independent, Northern Ireland will reunite with Ireland, and Gilbraltar will become a self-ruling part of Spain.

Re: Don't Panic

[byornski]

I'm claiming Irish citizenship through a reverse agreement. Anyone born on the island before 2005 can claim it. On a darker note, I didn't say it would bring peace. If anything it will inflame tensions in NI. Source : From NI

From what I can tell

[rsilvergun]

the trouble with Britain and America right now is that there's been 40 years of policy that benefits well educated upper middle class college grads and hurts blue collar workers. The Blue collar guys sucked it down in stride for those 40 years but it sounds like they're at their wits end. They're desperate to do _something_ but they don't know what. They've got a lot of ideology and beliefs that make it hard to go the Scandinavian Socialism route to solve their economic problems and there's no way they can compete on a global stage with slave labor let alone the coming robots. But they've got to do something Britain gets "Brexit" on over here we get Trump.

Not sure about the UK but 20 years ago phone polls would like the upper cast keep tabs on voting patters and focus their political campaigns, but now that everybody has a cell phone and you can't do polling calls to them the old political tricks aren't working. It doesn't do any good to have even unlimited funds if you don't know where to put them and you needed those phone polls to tell you what to do next. So Britain had no idea Brexit was coming (Cameron's resignation showed that) and the US is desperately trying to Stop Trump...

It's gonna get really, really messy from here on out.

Re:From what I can tell

[Solandri]

While I agree with the white/blue collar angle, there's more going on here than that. Ideally a unified economy is most efficient. Same standards, same regulations, same processes, policies, etc. promotes efficiency. A business doesn't have to jump through a dozen hoops to sell their products in multiple countries, they just have to jump through one.

Practically, a big unified economy is highly unlikely to always develop the best set of standards, regulations, processes, policies, etc. There are just too many sub-groups (national governments, states, etc.) demanding to be pleased. You throw them a bone just to get them to shut up, and it creates red tape that's really unnecessary from the viewpoint of everyone else, but now they have to comply. Multiply that by a couple dozen countries or states and that's a lot of added red tape.

So small is bad. But really big is bad too. You want a balance between the agility of striking out on your own path, and the efficiency of large size. At 500 million people, maybe the EU has just gotten too big. I see similar signs from the U.S. (300 million people), where increasing polarization suggests different groups of people (not necessarily divided along state lines) seem to have different ideas for the best way to proceed, but are getting more and more upset at each other for forcing everyone to go either one way or another.

These differences of opinion on how best to proceed don't necessarily have to be along political lines. White vs blue collar is more or less an apolitical division. A country or union with single standards for both types of workers may not always be ideal. Whereas a country which focuses on manufacturing can prioritize policies important to blue collar workers, while a country which focuses on (say) finance can prioritize policies important to white collar workers, which results in less friction forming between the two groups.

Re:From what I can tell

[RichPowers]

"I see similar signs from the U.S. (300 million people), where increasing polarization suggests different groups of people (not necessarily divided along state lines) seem to have different ideas for the best way to proceed, but are getting more and more upset at each other for forcing everyone to go either one way or another."

Montesquieu believed that republics could only survive if they were small. I'm sure this was influenced by his study of the ancient Roman Republic and how it turned into an empire ruled by autocrats and generals. (See "Considerations on the Causes of the Greatness of the Romans and their Decline" -- very readable and considerably shorter than Gibbon's more famous work on the subject.) The fact that tiny Switzerland is probably the most sensible republic in the West is due, in part, to its very smallness.

The Framers of the U.S. Constitution were familiar with Montesquieu; indeed, the entire point of the federal system was to (attempt to) harmonize the need for a stronger federal government to handle things like shared security and trade while still leaving considerable sovereignty to the states.

So to your point: if California wants to be the next socialist utopia with a massive welfare state and useless state-funded high-speed trains, have at it! Likewise, New Hampshire can go full libertarian. It's the whole "laboratories of democracy" concept – different ideas for different groups of people. Totally scalable regardless of population, if the federal government lets it happen, and lets states fail or succeed on their merits.

But Washington directs and influences too much of the economy, e.g., the military-industrial complex is a massive jobs and pork project for literally millions of people. The federal executive branch has so grossly overstepped its constitutional functions that it's horrifying and disgusting. Trump and Clinton would be far less dangerous to the republic if the office was considerably more modest and Americans didn't treat the President as some messianic figure who will deliver them jobs and other goodies! (Remember the days when presidential candidates ran "front porch" campaigns and submitted simple State of the Union letters to the congress instead of performing embarrassing and grandiose speeches?)

The problem in the Western World is the rolling disaster that's political and economic centralization. Brussels, Washington, the central banks, and other supporting institutions are all guilty. Among other ills, they create massive economic distortions (see the current college education bubble) and when everything inevitably explodes, they "save the day" – sort of like the fireman who burns down his own house and trumpets the great job he did later putting out the fire.

Lastly, dwell on this fact: the House of Representatives has had 435 members for almost a century, despite the massive growth in both population and size of the federal government. This means the ratio of citizens to representatives only grows more unfavorable, and at a time when it matters most! Concurrently, U.S. senators are no longer selected by state legislatures, leaving state governments without any way of directly influencing federal legislation. This is a total disaster for the federal republic and the chickens are coming home to roost.

Re:From what I can tell

[Calydor]

It is not only a matter of being too big, the EU spans too many countries with too varied economic backgrounds and stabilities.

I'm not only talking about Greece; the former east bloc countries like Poland are also a problem because they use the same currency but needs a lot LESS of it for the same gain. In an extremely simplified version, numbers completely made up:

In Poland, a loaf of bread costs 1 Euro. Hourly wage is 5 Euros.
In England, a loaf of bread costs 2 Euros. Hourly wage is 10 Euros.

So far, so good. Basic necessities cost the same percentage of your wage, not much difference. However ...

In Poland, a loaf of bread costs 1 Euro. Working in England for 8 Euros per hour lets you gain a lot more back home while wage dumping in a country that isn't your own. With enough people doing that problems start growing for the host country.

Re:From what I can tell

[Mashiki]

You can find them all over the place. Many have also lost upwards of $20k/year because their wages were pushed down by companies bringing in 3rd world workers to do the same job. It's happened here in Canada as well, a company laid off all of their welders in the patch and replaced them with TFW's from SE-Asia. The guys were making $70k/year the new guys? $39k in turn wages were depressed when those guys went out to find new work. Two guys I met in the patch 3 years ago are making $59k now(that was 2 years ago when they found new jobs), that was the only work they could find.

So far the only skilled workers that haven't been hit are pipe fitters, machinists and mechanics(gas/diesel/jet), but they're trying really hard to push the people who live here in north america and are diesel/jet mechanics out and get TFW's or other replacements in.

Re:From what I can tell

[getuid()]

Not going to change much for the average person.

EU is a bunch of national politicians patronizing their voters first, by introducing unpopular laws and measures they couldn't possibly introduce directly.

Then it's the same national politicians patronizing each other across borders -- Greece, Italy, Spain, Britain, even Germany... everyone gets their share of being patronized against doing useful stuff, necessary for the middle and the lower class citizens.

Last but not least everyone is being patronized by Big Business, who's effectively running the EU.

If Brits succeed in exitting, then if anything, it will at least show the rest of the EU conuntries that doing things just "because EU" is not the only option. That hast at least a marginal hope of getting some useful change.

Don't get me wrong, the concept of a unified Europe is cool. But the EU is not a unified Europe, it's a patronizing institution run by business, for business. We can try this again in 20 years, properly done, startgin democratically first and economically later, not the other way round.

Re:From what I can tell

[ultranova]

So to your point: if California wants to be the next socialist utopia with a massive welfare state and useless state-funded high-speed trains, have at it! Likewise, New Hampshire can go full libertarian. It's the whole "laboratories of democracy" concept â" different ideas for different groups of people.

What happens when one of these collapses under the insanity of its economic idealism and the population takes refuge on the other?

The problem with the "laboratories of democracy" concept is that humans aren't lab rats and won't just quietly die in their cage if the experiment fails.

The problem in the Western World is the rolling disaster that's political and economic centralization.

First centralization ended feudalism. Then it ended the cycle of European wars that had been going on ever since Rome fell. Now the growing international economic institutions have made it all but impossible for the Great Powers to fight wars with each other, while political ones are busy closing the ozone hole and trying to deal with global warming. If this continues we'll have peace, prosperity and clean air! Oh the humanity!

Humanity has been building larger and more complex societies ever since the dawn of history. It's not a "rolling disaster", it's what lets me sit in front of my computer in a lazy Sunday morning, sipping coffee and writing this message, rather than trying to eat my maggots quietly so I'll hear when the neighbouring tribe comes to kill me for them. As far as I'm concerned, we need more, not less, centralization, since it enables life to be more than just a constant struggle for survival.

Among other ills, they create massive economic distortions (see the current college education bubble)

Education is an ill now? Perhaps you're referring to the college debt crisis caused by college education in the US being handled by for-profit private institutions rather than the state?

Re:From what I can tell

[Mashiki]

There is no indication that salaries for welders have gone down:

Using data that's 4 years old prior to the oil crash no less. Time for you to go out and talk to people in the industry and you'll discover how wrong you are. Not forgetting that in the US average wages have declined the last 8 years by roughly $4k if I remember right. Canucks have a higher average wage then Americans do now, the last time that happened was in the 1970's.

And, yes, if you command $70k for welding (a really high end salary), you're overqualified for jobs that can be done by people making half as much. And a lot that high end speciality welding has just been taken over by other manufacturing methods.

No, $70k isn't high end, it's just past the median and under the norm for oil/NG/coal patch work, where you can see welders pulling in $150k/year.

Their jobs are becoming increasingly obsolete, with CNCs, electric vehicles, and new technologies. What's left is only the low-skill jobs, which, not surprisingly, will be handled by low cost, low skill labor.

No actually they aren't. Gas/diesel vehicles aren't going anywhere for at least another 50 years, there will be an increase in hybrid vehicles but outside of Europe? Battery vehicles for most people aren't going to be anything except for short range. Even here in Southern Ontario you can't get from one fast-charge station to another in some cases before you'd run out of juice. Anyway, mechanics shift with the times. As gas gets pushed out, you'll see them shift into the electronics end like many did in the 90's and become specialized in that. The guys who saw ahead that they were going to slap computers in every car and all that? Those mechanics are clearing $100-140k yearly these days. CNC's will go obsolete when millwrights do, likely never. Since you'll always need someone who can think beyond what a machine is programed to do and see the actual flaws of what's being made.

Re:From what I can tell

[AthanasiusKircher]

But Washington directs and influences too much of the economy, e.g., the military-industrial complex is a massive jobs and pork project for literally millions of people. The federal executive branch has so grossly overstepped its constitutional functions that it's horrifying and disgusting. Trump and Clinton would be far less dangerous to the republic if the office was considerably more modest and Americans didn't treat the President as some messianic figure who will deliver them jobs and other goodies!

Just wanted to note, since you mentioned the fall of the Roman Republic, that this sort of thing is precisely the flaw that arguably brought down the Roman Republic. The "root password" to any political system's governing structure is always appeasement of the masses. Montesquieu skips over the early elements of this story in Rome, but one of the harbingers of doom for the Roman Republic happened with the Gracchi brothers, who were some of the earliest Romans to seek radical populist reform. Concern about the rural poor and the plight of military veterans led to their attempts to circumvent many of the traditional Roman principles... including ignoring previous checks on power and re-election in their offices (Tribune of the Plebs). The Roman senators had the good sense to club Tiberius Gracchus to death.

The parallels to the Great Depression, Dust Bowl (affecting rural poor), marches of WWI veterans on Washington, and FDR's shocking election to 4 consecutive terms are just too numerous to go into a detailed comparison. After FDR's "New Deal" was repeatedly thrown out by the Supreme Court as being unconstitutional, finally the switch in time that saved nine overrode federalist principles in the Constitution that had functioned since 1789.

Now, of course the U.S. has gone on a different course than Rome did (with the upheavals under Sulla, Marius, etc.). But it's a little scary to me that the Roman Republic essentially lasted only 84 years after Tiberius Gracchus set it on the path toward ruin in 133 BC. Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49 BC, and was effectively declared dictator for life (after a series of consecutively consulships), effectively moving the Republic into an imperialist empire.

I'll just note that FDR was elected in 1932 with populist rhetoric to overturn the old Constitutional constraints on government power. It's now 2016, 84 years later, and we have the threat of a Trump presidency, a guy who seems to view his position in the world as dictatorial to say the least.

I'm not some crazy numerologist -- just noting that the timeline between when the Constitutional breakdown started to occur and where we are now is a shocking coincidence. It's sad that the generation around the 1930s was when Latin study and Roman study of the classics really started to be expunged from school curricula. For the past several decades we've been starting out on a track toward dissolution of a Republic and toward an Empire -- something the Founders, who were very aware of Roman precedent when they designed the government, hoped to prevent. But few people know about such history anymore, so they don't see the danger.

For all you guys who like to make fun of liberal arts majors... here's why history is important to know something about: to avoid making the same mistakes others have in the past.

Re: Don't Panic

[Anonymous Coward]

WHAT smaller bureaucracy ?

A whole lot of that now has to be recreated, just for Britain. I'm sure there was a lot of pissyness "It's not ours" i.e. it's more expensive to buy our way through, but losing the EU doesn't automatically mean a drop in costs here.

Re:Don't Panic

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember Norway is more or less an EU member, shares all the benefits and pays in but has no political power in EU. Benefits cost the same whether you are a member or not. UK was never a "full member", as UK had a lot of exemptions from rules and regulations while at the same time wielding political power. Power they wielded to make a mess of EU as possible.

Not having UK in EU might be a good thing, at least we'd have a lot less of bitching and bickering over nothing. The most stupid about this, is that if UK wants the benefits they will pay now full price as they will not have any political power in EU to reduce their members fee.

Par for the course. Modern political elites everywhere are CRIMINALLY STUPID beyond recognition (with varying degree of idiocy). I don't blame the British people, after all you can vote however you want, against or for your own interests. Witness what happens in the good old US of A. Two generations of rednecks voting against their own interests because who the hell knows. The blame of the British disaster is 100% on Cameron and the Tory party by indicting a referendum that should never have even been contemplated in the first place. That said I don't know what's more hilarious, the brexit, the post-brexit lies or the desire for another referendum that sets the clock straight again. This is Homer Simpson kind of stupidity. It just bogles the mind.
What do the British gain post-brexit ? Dissolution sooner or later of the United Kingdom, loss of all the exceptions they had in the EU, loss of political power in the EU. I just can't wrap my mind around such a stupid disaster. It's the proverbial "cutting off the nose to spite the face". From now on I can never again consider a British subject as an intelligent person. Not after what they have done to themselves. The British Empire is over guys, maybe that news still hasn't reached your wretched island. Always always blame the damn mail.

Re:Don't Panic

[aepervius]

Firstly the "absurd" regulation angle is overrated : a lot of what people call absurd regulation were actually industry internal proposed regulation to offer standardization. Stop reading the sun or swallowing advert telling you stupid stuff about 109 pillow laws when in really it isn't.

Secondly it IS already happening. Some financial industry were allowed to be in UK because the UK was in Europe. If UK is not, those industry may not remain in London because by law they must be in a member state. So no matter the agreement , those have to GO.

As for deal being worked out, everybody be it the politician or the folk of each country , clearly said they won't give a good deal to the UK. Neither do they have an insensitive to ! They are already pressuring to have a quick brexit and short negotiation, which will almost certainly turn out not so good for UK.

Re:Don't Panic

[Anonymous Coward]

Because the same rich European elites who benefit from the pre-Brexit conditions will stand to benefit from those conditions mostly continuing. And they're the people in charge of the EU.

If the EU continues to treat the UK as nothing happened you can bet your ass the other big countries will give the finger to Germany and opt out as well. Starting from France and the Netherlands.

Scotland and Ireland can't separate

[Anonymous Coward]

Scotland would be loaded with 130 billion pounds of debt.

Re:Scotland and Ireland can't separate

[Anonymous Coward]

Scotland would be loaded with 130 billion pounds of debt.

Which they could pay off comparatively quickly because they have most of the UK's oil. That's true despite falling oil prices.

Scotland's ledger will start looking much healthier than that of the rest of the UK once they leave, despite inheriting a proportion of the UK's shared debt. It's the rest of the UK whose national debt should be a source of concern, not Scotland's.

Re:Don't Panic

[Fire_Wraith]

The UK already had a pretty good deal, in that it basically was able to pick and choose - and even got extra concessions a few months back, in advance of the vote. At this point, further conciliation will only hurt the EU, because it will encourage other countries in the bloc to try the same, at which point, it won't be much of a bloc at all.

No, the EU is probably going to react very negatively, if only to make an example out of Britain. They'll play hardball, because economically speaking, Britain needs the other EU members more than the EU needs them (even if there will be pain all around). Look at where British trade goes now - something like 36% of it goes to major EU members. That's more than they trade with the USA and China combined (~20%), and that's aside from the fact that right now it's Britain using EU trade deals with the USA and China, not its own separate ones. The EU is going to insist that all its regulations apply to any products made in Britain that are sold in the EU, and at that point, it becomes cheaper for the manufacturers in Britain to apply the same to their domestic market. The reason the EU will do this is simple - they don't want France going "well we want our own special deal too." No, they'd rather freeze Britain out as an example.

Re:Don't Panic

[peppepz]

Exactly, the EU zone has only been beneficial to business

Yes, an open market is the best possible condition for creating jobs. That's what anyone with a basic competence in economy says, so there must be some truth in it.

and the Soviet Bloc countries (business moving there for cheap labor and eventually even further east was the whole objective for the forming of the EU). Before the EU and even now, similar business-friendly arrangements have been made amongst European and even Asian countries without any EU government involvement.

So the EU is evil, but also the EU doesn't matter, because rich people will move their businesses to China anyway?

The EU and later on the Euro destroyed the sovereignty of individual nations (now only nations by name only for traditions' sake),

People elect both their local governments and the European parliament. Their local governments nominate the European government and it also has to be approved by the European parliament. And that government has very limited powers to begin with. The EU didn't destroy our sovereignty any more than the administrator of a condominium destroys the flat owners' ownership.

Of course, if member states send into the EU institutions their worst politicians who failed at home, it's a problem. But hardly a fault of the EU.

the Brits were at least smart enough to maintain some of their distance when the Euro came along.

The Brits have, among other things, a religious leader as unelected, unreplaceable Head of State and Lord Spirituals sitting alongside elected members of the Parliament. To each his own.

The EU socialized the losses of its members on a continental scale (Greece etc) while the affluent Western Europe had their middle class evaporate to pay for it and many of those countries (Netherlands, Belgium and France) will soon follow the UK.

The EU budget accounts for 1% of the total taxes paid by European citizens, how can one see its wealth evaporate because of a fluctuation of up to 1% in his expenses? It's globalization what hit the middle class; it has allowed us to pay less for iPhones without automatically giving us back a way to pay for food and housing. But I can hardly see how being a smaller country in the global maket can help fight that.

Plus, this whole "the North paying for the South" subtly racist propaganda is toxic. Britain was the poorest among the big nations when it joined the EEC. Currently, it is France, Italy and Spain who pay for the British rebate and not the other way around.

Re:Don't Panic

[LSD-OBS]

From now on I can never again consider a British subject as an intelligent person. Not after what they have done to themselves.

I'm British and I have been trying to explain exactly the same fucking points as listed by you, but these people really are too stupid to understand what's in their own best interests. What's even worse, most of the people in the Remain camp were themselves too busy breathing through their mouths to actually mount an intellectually sound defense against some of the absolute bullshit proferred by the Leavers.

So I'm kinda with you on this.

Re:Don't Panic

[ooloorie]

That will be (pinky to lips) one million pounds in tax revenues.

Asian reaction appears favorable

[Wizardess]

I suspect the Asian nations will be pleased with brexit simply because they get access to the British market and goods without the EU getting in the way. Maybe this will be the end of expensive DSLR cameras that are limited to 29'59" of recording because the EU arbitrarily defined 30 minutes or more as a video camera and slapped much higher tariffs on them.

Maybe the next couple years will be time to invest in Britain rather than try to escape. Look at both sides of the possible effects before you jump.

{^_^}

Control the borders

[backslashdot]

Why have a border? What is the purpose of a border? It is to keep people out because you think they are evil, will drink the milk out the bottle from your fridge, look ugly and smell bad too. Why should poor countries be stuck with keeping the bad people when they would do more damage? At least the richer countries can catch the criminals and jail them or something.

Gotta look out for "your own" .. but is that even moral? Does God value the human life of a person in one country over another? You can allow the deaths of thousands to save a few of your own? How is that moral?

Why would you lock yourself out of interacting with foreigners? That will only breed mutual hatred and an arms race. Keeping people out is not sustainable. Eventually the other countries will want in. And there will be a big war. . Eventually there will be a war, that is guaranteed. At some point you are going to want something from another country and they will refuse to give it to you. Or vice versa. They will want something of yours, you will refuse to give it .. and they will try to take it. Then you will war.

The only sustainable future for humanity is for everyone to get along with each other. This is only possible through interaction, through everyone understanding the concepts of free speech, freedom of religion, right to a fair trial before punishment, right not to be tortured etc.

Its true a lot of third worlders don't understand these concepts, and you are afraid they will bring it to your country. But how does isolating these countries help? How will they learn these ideas if not through interaction? If you are cool with them never learning the values of freedom, eventually they will war. They will be ruled by dictators who build big weapons and will eventually try to take your stuff by force .. it may take 50 years or 100 .. but they will .. and with the nukes of today if even a few get through it's devastating.

Ever noticed that all the places that have ancient border walls are now tourist attractions that you can visit from both sides and still be in the sea country. It's not like the Great Wall of China or Emperor Hadrian's wall demarcates a border to this day .. What we have are failed empires.

Can and very likely will separate

[Roger W Moore]

Scotland would be loaded with 130 billion pounds of debt.

...and by the time this epic cluster fuck is resolved that won't be worth anything like as much as it is today will it? Besides if they got independence and offered Scottish citizenship in exchange for giving up British citizen I expect there would be a significant fraction of the 16 million predominantly well educated Brits who would happily take them up on the offer to regain EU citizenship and that would provide a massive boost to their economy.

Re:Can and very likely will separate

[AmiMoJo]

If Scotland leaves the UK it may well have to take on the Euro. If that happens, it can pretty much walk away from most of its financial crisis related debt because it actually all belongs to the UK government and just happens to have been given to Scottish banks to prop them up. There is no legal obligation for them to accept any of it, and seeing as they never elected any of the governments that caused it an opposed most of the polices that lead to it, I doubt they will be feeling much moral obligation either.

Re:Can and very likely will separate

[AmiMoJo]

You link doesn't even mention Scotland.

This was all looked at during the last referendum. The UK government threatened not to allow Scotland to keep the Pound, and it was pointed out to them that Scotland wouldn't have to keep its share of the debt either in that case.

Just think through logically what the implications of your claim would be. The UK government could take out a â9,000,000,000,000 loan the day before independence. Scotland leaves with it's "share" of that debt, but the UK government keeps all the money and pays off its share the day after, keeping the difference and leaving Scotland completely screwed.

Re:Don't Panic

[Anonymous Coward]

If you mean Northern Ireland, there is little impetus there to change what people are seeing as peace. Factions on the far sides might want to play it that way but it's basically not going to happen.

Nope, no one wants to change the situation in Northern Ireland. Oh, wait -

"Sinn Fein calls for a referendum on Irish reunification"
"Northern Irish people are scrambling for Irish passports after Brexit"
"Brexit: The same recklessness that has tipped us out of the EU could cause Northern Ireland's departure from UK"

Re:Don't Panic

[serviscope_minor]

Oh gosh you've picked on the curved bananas one. It is just tragic how people voted off the depths of such ignorance.

That was a UK law which we persuaded Brussels to apply EU wide, so we could sell our Class I fruit to everyone else without an expensive and tedious re-sorting.

Yeah Europe and its laws are so evil.

Re:Don't Panic

[bothemeson]

The Green Party was consistent in being pro EU. They are generally excluded from the media debates as - (1) the First Past the Post favours the largest parties and the only other party that small is the UKIP - who make far better headlines for the media. (2) The print media are 80% owned by 5 anti-EU individuals who stand to gain more media power in a post-Brexit UK. (3) The UK Civil Service (completely anti-EU) are also very antagonistic towards their communitarian ethos.

Re:Oh so the companies / management / shareholders

[serviscope_minor]

Globalisation is screwing a heap of people.

Well, you've really screwed the pooch then.

Globalization as it's usually framed is essentially free movement of goods and money, without the free movement of labour. This is great for companies as they can always move things to the cheapest area and since the labour can't follow, they get to squeeze people regionally.

Being in the EU we had free movement of people.

Being outside we'll wind up with a bunch of agreements, i.e. free movement of goods and money (beneficial to companies) without the attendant benefit to people of free movement of labour. Leaving the EU is actually a boost to the worst parts of globalization.

Re:Don't Panic

[JaredOfEuropa]

Exactly what they're saying in Brussels; they are bent on "digging fire corridors" as they call it: make the most dire economic consequences a reality, in order to make an example out of Britain. Thankfully a few national European leaders have already objected and said that the Brexit is to be conducted in an orderly fashion and on friendly terms. Which makes sense: isolating Britain is going to hurt the EU as well, in a big way.

Re:Don't Panic

[Hognoxious]

Consumer protection in the UK is actually stronger than the EU mandates, and it's strongly enforced. The equal pay act was passed in 1970, before Britain joined the EEC (or whatever it was called then).

Re:Don't Panic

[AmiMoJo]

Individual countries are going to be looking out for their own interests. For example, Spain sees this as a great opportunity to get joint sovereignty over Gibraltar. Realistically we won't be able to resist their efforts, because once we are out of the EU they can make the border crossing so slow and painful for non-EU citizens, and depending on the deal we get maybe even require a visa.

Some in the French government are talking about moving the border for Calais back to the UK too. Even if it doesn't happen, it's great leverage. Again, depending on the deal we do, I can't see them wanting to maintain a completely foreign border on their soil.

Re:Don't Panic

[jonbryce]

That has happened because the situation in Northern Ireland has changed. One of the main reasons why they wanted Northern Ireland to become part of Ireland is because of the benefits than free trade and an open border with the South would bring. Being fellow members of the EU meant that they could have those benefits while still being part of the UK. After the border was opened, unemployment in Newry, a city close to the border, fell from 30% to 6%, thanks mainly to people from the South visiting the city to go shopping, and businesses being able to export their goods much more easily to the South.

Re:Don't Panic

[MrKaos]

Not having UK in EU might be a good thing, at least we'd have a lot less of bitching and bickering over nothing.

The leavers in the UK seem to be the 'pompous gits' and I'm wondering if the EU isn't partially releived that the dead weight is gone. It's like being snubbed by one of your favoured friends and seeing their true colours.

Really sad for the UK citizens under 50 though.

Re:Don't Panic

[swb]

I think panic angle is manufactured by the media.

To the extent that Brexit challenges the "free" trade mindset, the media represents the transnational corporate community who sees one less free opportunity to arbitrage actual geographic market differences, labor prices and product prices. The media is so closely aligned with these business interests that they can't see the forest for the trees.

The larger part of the panic is the existential panic of the media which is heavily invested in the idealistic politics of the EU, the anti-nationalism, the open borders and free movement and the pro-diversity politics which underlies it. There's also the rational-bureaucratic aspect of it, the kind of heavy, rational, "data" and "fact" based central administration that they admire.

I think the media's political alarms are ringing loudly -- they realize that the vote for Brexit is a vote against the media's long term political agenda and they worry this is the first domino to fall and it will only encourage other political forces also opposed to their agenda, various right wing parties opposed to immigration and in favor of stronger local controls.

I just don't see how Brexit works out to near the panic it's made out to be. The UK isn't physically relocating thousands of miles away and the basic aspects of the UK economy aren't really changing, and to the extent that they will change, the change will take years. The only major losers (and I doubt they ever really lose...) are the transnational corporations and the political advocates of open borders, diversity and central administration.

Re:Don't Panic

[Barsteward]

the remain responded with facts (and a bit of over egging the pudding) but the small minded people are not really interested in facts, scare mongering headlines are all they read and unfortunately, the right wing papers are too eager to supply. Facts are always lost in a story.

Re: Don't Panic

[Samantha Wright]

From the same totally unbiased Russia Today article:

On the eve of the 70th anniversary of the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union, Chancellor Angela Merkel said Germany should substantially increase its defense spending.

Re: Don't Panic

[rossdee]

WTF? Russia was invaded in 1941, so the 70th anniversary would be 2011.

Re:Don't Panic

[Computershack]

Norway had to accept Euro schengen zone and many of the EU regulations in which they have no say in. .

http://www.aecr.eu/less-than-1...

Re:Don't Panic

[thegarbz]

Remain camp were themselves too busy breathing through their mouths to actually mount an intellectually sound defense against some of the absolute bullshit proferred by the Leavers.

This right here should have been a warning sign to all. The summary of the debate so far:

Remain: We have what we have now more or less. Leaving could be better, but could be worse we just don't know and it's risky.
Leave: INDEPENDENCE DAY. Kick out the immigrants. Save squillions of pounds that we can feed into a healthcare system we don't actually believe in (remember who is running this campaign). Fuck the EU. Rise up against those anti-democratic overloards. We're sooo much better than them. Don't listen to experts, we don't need those damn experts. *Froths at the mouth*.

Without any political knowledge or skin in the game, these debates alone should have made people vote remain. If there was a good reason to leave then you wouldn't need all the hyperbole and to some extent blatant lies, and the leave camp should have stood up on it's merits. It didn't.

Re:Don't Panic

[SuricouRaven]

The vacuum cleaner regulation applied only to domestic vacuum cleaners, and the power limit was very generous. It was to combat the issue of manufacturers building deliberately inefficient appliances to inflate their power figures - because customers are idiots, and will buy a 2500W vacuum cleaner because it has a really big number.

Re:Don't Panic

[MrL0G1C]

Cameron wasn't against the idea of a EU army, he said he'd support it as long as other countries paid their fair share towards it. Understandable since we have a higher military budget.

Very good reason to leave IMO, along with the democratic argument.

Re:Don't Panic

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that the UK needs the EU more than the opposite based on market size alone. The EU does not have to go soft on the UK and send a clear message to its members.

Re:Don't Panic

[MrL0G1C]

Switzerland, one of the EU's wealthiest economies with a very strong economy voted to leave Schengen in 2014. And it's outside of the EU. And it just said last week that it's no longer interested in joining the EU.

And France rejected the EU, And The Netherlands rejected the EU. And Iceland ripped up it's EU application.

This institution is the institution that gave us TTIP, the treaty that would give corporations the right to sue any EU government that introduces legislation that effects it's profits even when that government is legislating to protect workers rights or the environment or public services or food standards. When did I ever get to vote for them?

Re: Don't Panic

[An dochasac]

I'm claiming Irish citizenship through a reverse agreement. Anyone born on the island before 2005 can claim it. On a darker note, I didn't say it would bring peace. If anything it will inflame tensions in NI. Source : From NI

You'd better check your sources. Ireland's Citizenship referendum ended Irish citizenship by birth in 2005 after a campaign reminiscent of UKIP's xenophobic frothing at the mouth. Tax-funded RTE and the Irish newspapers played up rumors of hundreds of "non-national" anchor babies being born in Dublin airport every day, just as state media, BBC decided to report scary UK immigration statistics on election day. Contrary to popular belief, public funding of broadcasting doesn't magically make it less biased than the US corporate-owned media, the BBC used TV licenses from white and non-white British citizens to fund shows such as George Mitchell's Black and White Minstrel show until the late 1970s.

Ireland's citizenship referendum didn't do as much damage as the Brexit vote because sensible heads in Dáil Éireann interpreted that populist vote as slightly less tyranny of the majority than the majority would have preferred. A grandfather rule allowed parents of Irish born children born before 2005 to have the equivalent of a dodgy green card, with expensive renewals every three years via a chaotic and draconian bureaucracy, proof that we are supporting ourselves and proof that we had not committed ANY crimes (we had to submit documentation of any parking tickets and speeding fines.) This was not citizenship, it was limbo and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. If you've found a short-cut to Irish citizenship, don't tell the others who've wasted years, spent thousands of Euro and presented their first born child (I kid you not.) They will tell you to get to the back of the queue.

Let's hope Britain's parliament has as much courage to do the right thing despite what mob democracy prescribes. Referendums would have kept institutionalized slavery and segregation well into the 21st century.

Re:Don't Panic

[Dunbal]

the history of Europe is full of them killing each other.

The history of the WORLD is about people killing each other. Over politics. Fashion. Religion and worshiping the wrong god. Worshiping the right god in the wrong way. Speaking a funny language. Etc. Saying that Europe has a history of killing each other can't be used as a logical argument for anything, since that's pretty much the base state of all humanity anyway.

Re:Don't Panic

[Dunbal]

The skids have been greasing for a long time. However unlike what Jean Claude Jucker and his massive ego proposes, I don't believe for one minute that it's the "EU" that has prevented another European catastrophe. Minor other points like perhaps NATO, nuclear weapons and the promise of mutually assured destruction have had much, MUCH more influence and will continue to do so.

In fact one could argue that the EU which was already well underway in the 1990's did nothing to prevent say, the Balkan crisis... again NATO fixed that problem. And NATO will continue to fix problems. Because NATO is stronger than any single European nation. It is the proverbial club to beat the rest back into line, when it's not pretending that the Russians are coming.

Re: Don't Panic

[The Wannabe King]

The Commission is invested by, and can be dismissed by, the democratically elected European Parliament. Sure, the Parliament could have been given wider powers, but that would make the EU more like a federation, and that was unpopular in many countries, including the UK.

Re: Don't Panic

[The Wannabe King]

The Commission was voted in by the EU Parliament where the UK has (had?) its fair share of votes. You don't directly elect the UK Cabinet either.

Re:Don't Panic

[lordholm]

You again... can't you even get simple things right?

Switzerland, one of the EU's wealthiest economies with a very strong economy voted to leave Schengen in 2014. And it's outside of the EU. And it just said last week that it's no longer interested in joining the EU.

Switzerland did not vote to leave Schengen, the voted to abolish the freedom of movement parts of their association agreement with the EU. That agreement granted access to the common market and provided freedom of movement to EU citizens to go to Switzerland and Swiss to go to the EU and work.

And France rejected the EU, And The Netherlands rejected the EU. And Iceland ripped up it's EU application.

France and the Netherlands rejected the constitutional treaty, not the EU. They didn't want a constitution so we do not have one now. The result is that we keep on with amending treaty after treaty.

Note that there are significant differences between the constitutional treaty and Lisbon. For one thing the symbol part is gone, for another thing the constitutional treaty removed the "ever closing union" part which forms the basis for a lot of case law from the ECJ. In my opinion, the removal of that clause was enough to reject the constitutional treaty as it was written.

Iceland did cancel their application, I think this was the only thing you wrote that was actually correct.

This institution is the institution that gave us TTIP, the treaty that would give corporations the right to sue any EU government that introduces legislation that effects it's profits even when that government is legislating to protect workers rights or the environment or public services or food standards. When did I ever get to vote for them?

TTIP is not yet finalised and is the product of a request from Obama to have such treaty. Likely, in its current form, it will be rejected by the Council of Ministers and the EP (using majority voting), the Council of Ministers is controlled by member state parliaments, and they can mandate that the minister votes in a certain way. There are certain problems with the TTIP, but virtually all international treaties gives effected legal persons the right to sue governments or use an arbitration court to settle issues when one party violates the treaty and causes financial harm. Note that such law suites / arbitration procedures are only if the treaty provisions are violated. Any other legislative act that causes financial harm is not subject to such court proceedings.

Re:The primary issue for the tech sector will be..

[Ash-Fox]

The primary issue for the tech sector will be that the UK can no longer be used to take advantage of "the final assembly tariff loophole"

Due to how VAT works, that's not been a loop hole in the EU for import taxes.