I don’t get why people are saying there should be a punishment.
The EU is saying that participation is voluntary, but making the idea that leaving for a bit, just to realise it was wrong, and then to be punished for it to rejoin, feels less voluntary and more you better do what we say or there will be consequences. The idea that it is to deter other countries that aren’t fully in is stupid too. Why not just let them leave and then realise it’s wrong when it happens and come back?
Like if a family member that I know and love hurts me and leaves, I’d eventually welcome them back and let bygones be bygones, because we are a team. But if it’s some coworker I don’t care about, I’d want to be made right for the troubles.
If the idea of the EU is to be a coalition of allies, why are people thinking of punishing bad behaviour as opposed to rewarding learning and improving behaviour?
I may seem bias because I am from the UK, but I have always been a remainer and I would feel the same if France or Spain or whatever left instead, or if they do in the future.
It’s good to let the leavers feel a taste of how bad it is to do it, but joining should always be a good thing and not a punishment.
Nobody outside UK cares about the colour of the passport, the Sterling or their non-metric measurements. As far as I’m concerned they can keep all that garbage.
UK however had some privileges in accepting EU legislation as they saw fit. All the while being a net receiver of EU funding. That just doesn’t add up.
This special treatment is exactly what caused Brexit to begin with. UK was never really all in on EU.
If they want to rejoin, they’d better be all in on collaboration with EU, instead of cherry picking as they were before.
Those privileges are not a right granted to members of the EU. They abandonned those privileges when they left.
Joining back should start at the same baseline as any other country negotiating an entry to the EU. If they want their privileges back, the EU should get something for it in exchange, like any decent negociation. The UK is not in the position of strength that made those one-sided privileges possible when they joined.
I don’t get why people are saying there should be a punishment.
Being treated exactly like every other country outside the EU is not a punishment. A punishment would be demanding reparations for the damages the UK inflicted with Brexit, which you’ll note neither me nor anybody else here I could see asked for.
[…] Why not just let them leave and then realise it’s wrong when it happens and come back?
This is what that looks like: Accept the same terms as anybody else or don’t join. There are plenty of ways to have constructive cooperations without the UK joining the EU.
Like if a family member that I know and love hurts me and leaves, I’d eventually welcome them back and let bygones be bygones, because we are a team. But if it’s some coworker I don’t care about, I’d want to be made right for the troubles.
“We” are not a family. The EU is a confederation. If we were a family, I would require both contrition and some form of reparations, because breaking such a much closer bond has more severe consequences.
It’s good to let the leavers feel a taste of how bad it is to do it, but joining should always be a good thing and not a punishment.
If the UK thinks joining on the same terms as anybody else is a punishment they are free to not join. We have way too many grandfathered-in friction-causing privileges already.
Not getting old privileges back is not punishment. It’s the logical progression from leaving a community where you had special privileges grandfathered in and then joining when new members don’t get those privileges anymore. The UK doesn’t get punished, it gets the same deal as everyone else.
-Only one Article 50 per decade
-France gets one free cock punch
-Not allowed to ask for “proper food” on holiday
-Cheddar now called “Fromage Anglais”
-Only UK is subject to all the fake EU directives about bendy bananas invented by the London press
As a UK citizen: yes, please. We need to commit this time, and that will mean actually taking part with gusto. Our arms-length approach to the EU was one of the reasons the Brexiteers were able to peddle their them-vs-us narrative.
Though I would just ask that if we’re going to adopt the Euro, can we please make the banknotes look a little less drab.
The Euro was established by treaty in 1992, named in 1995, introduced in 1999 for accounting and as physical cash in 2002.
Anyone joining the EU before 1992 could simply reject the Euro because it wasn’t a part of the deal when they joined. Only Denmark and United Kingdom opted out.
Between 1992 and 1999 only 3 countries joined the EU. Finland and Austria decided to join the Eurozone. Sweden decided to “wait”.
Anyone joining since then has to switch as soon as they meet the requirements.
This leaves Sweden in a unique position, which is why nobody is giving them too much of a hard time for ensuring that they never technically fulfill the requirements for switching.
Funny to pick Sweden. They are actually obligated to adopt the Euro per the terms of the treaty as soon as they meet the adoption criteria, but are playing some cute games to intentionally avoid ever meeting the criteria. It’s unlikely another member state would get away with the same playbook.
Denmark is the only eu member who negotiated to not have to adopt the Euro ever. The UK was exempt too but I don’t expect they’ll get that back. There is much more worthwhile things to go for, and it’s not like the pound is as strong as it was in 2001 either.
I’m all for constructive cooperation moving forward, as long as the UK never gets its special privileges back.
I don’t get why people are saying there should be a punishment.
The EU is saying that participation is voluntary, but making the idea that leaving for a bit, just to realise it was wrong, and then to be punished for it to rejoin, feels less voluntary and more you better do what we say or there will be consequences. The idea that it is to deter other countries that aren’t fully in is stupid too. Why not just let them leave and then realise it’s wrong when it happens and come back?
Like if a family member that I know and love hurts me and leaves, I’d eventually welcome them back and let bygones be bygones, because we are a team. But if it’s some coworker I don’t care about, I’d want to be made right for the troubles.
If the idea of the EU is to be a coalition of allies, why are people thinking of punishing bad behaviour as opposed to rewarding learning and improving behaviour?
I may seem bias because I am from the UK, but I have always been a remainer and I would feel the same if France or Spain or whatever left instead, or if they do in the future.
It’s good to let the leavers feel a taste of how bad it is to do it, but joining should always be a good thing and not a punishment.
Nobody outside UK cares about the colour of the passport, the Sterling or their non-metric measurements. As far as I’m concerned they can keep all that garbage.
UK however had some privileges in accepting EU legislation as they saw fit. All the while being a net receiver of EU funding. That just doesn’t add up.
This special treatment is exactly what caused Brexit to begin with. UK was never really all in on EU.
If they want to rejoin, they’d better be all in on collaboration with EU, instead of cherry picking as they were before.
Those privileges are not a right granted to members of the EU. They abandonned those privileges when they left.
Joining back should start at the same baseline as any other country negotiating an entry to the EU. If they want their privileges back, the EU should get something for it in exchange, like any decent negociation. The UK is not in the position of strength that made those one-sided privileges possible when they joined.
Being treated exactly like every other country outside the EU is not a punishment. A punishment would be demanding reparations for the damages the UK inflicted with Brexit, which you’ll note neither me nor anybody else here I could see asked for.
This is what that looks like: Accept the same terms as anybody else or don’t join. There are plenty of ways to have constructive cooperations without the UK joining the EU.
“We” are not a family. The EU is a confederation. If we were a family, I would require both contrition and some form of reparations, because breaking such a much closer bond has more severe consequences.
If the UK thinks joining on the same terms as anybody else is a punishment they are free to not join. We have way too many grandfathered-in friction-causing privileges already.
Not getting old privileges back is not punishment. It’s the logical progression from leaving a community where you had special privileges grandfathered in and then joining when new members don’t get those privileges anymore. The UK doesn’t get punished, it gets the same deal as everyone else.
New rules:
-Only one Article 50 per decade -France gets one free cock punch -Not allowed to ask for “proper food” on holiday -Cheddar now called “Fromage Anglais” -Only UK is subject to all the fake EU directives about bendy bananas invented by the London press
Yeah. No “refund”, they switch to the Euro, and ideally join Shengen.
As a UK citizen: yes, please. We need to commit this time, and that will mean actually taking part with gusto. Our arms-length approach to the EU was one of the reasons the Brexiteers were able to peddle their them-vs-us narrative.
Though I would just ask that if we’re going to adopt the Euro, can we please make the banknotes look a little less drab.
Euro is not a requirement of being in EU. See Sweden for instance.
The Euro was established by treaty in 1992, named in 1995, introduced in 1999 for accounting and as physical cash in 2002.
Anyone joining the EU before 1992 could simply reject the Euro because it wasn’t a part of the deal when they joined. Only Denmark and United Kingdom opted out.
Between 1992 and 1999 only 3 countries joined the EU. Finland and Austria decided to join the Eurozone. Sweden decided to “wait”.
Anyone joining since then has to switch as soon as they meet the requirements.
This leaves Sweden in a unique position, which is why nobody is giving them too much of a hard time for ensuring that they never technically fulfill the requirements for switching.
Funny to pick Sweden. They are actually obligated to adopt the Euro per the terms of the treaty as soon as they meet the adoption criteria, but are playing some cute games to intentionally avoid ever meeting the criteria. It’s unlikely another member state would get away with the same playbook.
Oh, I didn’t know that. Thanks for brand new knowledge!
Denmark is the only eu member who negotiated to not have to adopt the Euro ever. The UK was exempt too but I don’t expect they’ll get that back. There is much more worthwhile things to go for, and it’s not like the pound is as strong as it was in 2001 either.
Yes, but the British ego remains