Why are Remainers so convinced that staying in the European Union is what is best for the UK?

[SirGalahad]

https://www.quora.com/Why-are-Remai...-is-best-for-the-UK/answer/Barry-McGuinness-1

Absolutley spot on.

I have copied the whole article below as it dissects the whole leave argument.

 

[SirGalahad]

First, because the key arguments for Britain leaving the EU are false.

Second, because it’s become much clearer what Brexit was really about all along.

ARGUMENTS FOR LEAVING THE EU …

“The EU threatens British sovereignty”

Many in Britain believe that the EU has undermined British parliamentary sovereignty, and that leaving the EU is the only way for the British people to ‘take back control’, especially with regard to democracy and law.

And yet the UK has never, at any point, lost control to the EU.[1]Even the UK Government’s own outline for leaving the EU states that “Parliament has remained sovereign throughout our membership of the EU,” then merely adds that ”it hasn’t always felt like that.”[2]

In reality, the UK has simply opted-in to a multinational collaborative ‘club’ in order to achieve certain multinational objectives and shared benefits, such as

• operating as a powerful single market;
• enjoying hassle-free international travel for business, holidays, studying, working, research, etc.,
• collaborating successfully on everything from cancer research to crime to climate change.

Club membership also comes with a number of rules and regulations, which are constantly evolving. As a particularly strong and influential member, the UK has always had considerable power to shape these. But now, by leaving the EU, the UK is losing all of this power as well as all of the membership benefits.

“If you take back the right to set your own rules and standards, it will by definition become harder to do business with countries that use different ones. If you want to trade, you will probably end up following the rules of a more powerful partner—which for Britain means the EU or America—only without a say in setting them.”

• ‘Brexit, the mother of all messes’. The Economist, 17 Jan 2019.

It seems ironic, then, that the UK is losing power, losing trade and losing benefits in the name of ‘taking back control’.

Even more ironically, by ‘taking back control’ with a no-deal Brexit, the UK will have to comply with trade rules set behind closed doors in Geneva by the unelected committees of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). [3]

“The UK needs control of its own borders”

The UK doesn’t need to leave the EU to have control of its own borders.

For one thing, the UK has never opted-in to the Schengen Area, a border-control-free subset of EU countries, precisely in order to maintain full control of its own borders.[4]

The Schengen Area:

Leaving the EU will of course mean the UK is no longer obliged to accept the free movement of EU citizens. The ‘free movement’ rule allows any EU resident the right to enter any other EU country and to remain for up to three months. No longer being part of the EU will no doubt reduce the volume of EU citizens visiting, studying, working and staying in the UK.[5]

But free movement grants residence for only up to three months. Beyond that, a visitor must meet certain criteria, such as studying or finding employment — plus the host nation’s own discretion.[6][7]The UK, however, doesn’t take full advantage of this and seems to keep quiet about it.[8][9]

This is partly because the UK chose not to restrict migration from new EU member states in Eastern Europe, and was then taken by surprise at the influx of migrants.[10]It’s also partly because the UK still lacks adequate methods for checking immigration statistics and monitoring those who over-stay.[11][12]

 

[SirGalahad]

“The EU is run by unelected bureaucrats in the European Commission”

Eurospectic politicians and newspapers are fond of referring to the officials of the European Union as ‘unelected bureaucrats’ or ‘eurocrats’, suggesting that these unaccountable officials make decisions that affect our lives.

In fact, the EU is run democratically by two bodies:

• the Council of the EU — a regular get-together of government ministers from each of the EU member states;
• the European Parliament — an assembly of 751 directly-elected MEPs representing their constituencies.

A third body, the European Commission consists of over 30,000 civil servants whose job is to administer EU laws. It is overseen by 28 Commissioners, one nominated by each member state.

While it is technically correct that the Commission’s civil servants are “unelected bureaucrats”, the same is true of all civil servants everywhere.

What is grossly incorrect is the idea that Europe is “governed” or “run” by these civil servants. This misconception may be due to the fact that it’s the Commission’s job to propose and implement new EU-wide legislation. But it does so only in an administrative capacity.

The Commission’s purpose is to keep EU-wide legislation consistent with policies adopted by the other bodies. Here’s how that works:

1. The Commission proposes new legislation in alignment with already-agreed EU policies.
2. The Council of the EU and the Parliament vote on whether or not to accept, reject or amend each proposal.
3. New legislation is enacted only if the two elected bodies jointly agree to it.
4. The Commission does the paperwork to implement their decision.

So what about all those ludicrous laws imposed on the British by dastardly eurocrats?

They don’t exist. They were deliberately made up by British anti-EU journalists, like a certain Boris Johnson.

From 1989–1994, Johnson was a bored young journalist reporting from the European Commission in Brussels. He soon found that he could easily make front-page headlines by portraying the European Commission as a bunch of incompetent, jumped-up foreigners undermining the natural greatness of the UK.

He also found that Brussels-bashing boosted his career prospects, as a lot of old-fashioned Conservatives back home believed every word he wrote.

Almost single-handedly, Johnson had created the brand of fake news known as ‘Euromyth’. It did of course mean ditching any semblance of journalistic integrity, just deliberately lying and scaremongering on a daily basis — but he managed to do it spectacularly well, and still does.

He was, however, recently caught red-handed:

 

[SirGalahad]

• In his leadership campaign, Johnson paraded a kipper claiming that ‘Brussels bureaucrats’ impose ridiculous rules on kipper packaging. In fact the packaging rules are set by the UK Food Standards Agency to ensure the safety of food bought online.[13]

“The UK will be economically better off outside the EU”

The EU entitles each member state to enjoy all the benefits that go with being part of the world’s most democratic trading bloc, such as tariff-free import/export trade. And as a huge single market, the EU has enough combined clout to level the playing field with the world’s other two economic superpowers, China and the US.

By cancelling its membership of the EU, the UK will lose all these economic advantages. [14]

Even the British Treasury’s own analyses of the effects of doing so are absolutely grim. Whether the outcome of leaving is Norway-style (EEA membership), Canada-style (bilateral agreement), or defaulting to WTO rules, there is no economic benefit to the UK:

The Treasury’s analysis shows that the UK would be permanently poorer if it left the EU and adopted any of these models. Productivity and GDP per person would be lower in all these alternative scenarios, as the costs would substantially outweigh any potential benefit of leaving the EU.

• HM Treasury analysis: the long-term economic impact of EU membership and the alternatives. HM Treasury, 18 April 2016.

Just to repeat the key part:

permanently poorer

British business will be hurt; British science and scholarship will be hurt; British workers will lose the right to work anywhere in Europe; British students will no longer be able to work or study anywhere in the EU; poorer areas like Cornwall and Wales will lose their EU grants. Every form of Brexit comes with serious economic costs that will really hurt British families, businesses, jobs, living standards and public finances for decades to come.

In the face of a global economy dominated by the US and China, plus covert trouble-making by Russia, the EU provides long-term stability, protection and resilience .[15]Following Brexit, however, the UK will become just another external country hoping to do business with the EU’s single market — a massive and powerful integrated market which currently buys half of the UK’s exports.[16]

Many leading Brexiteers are perfectly aware of all this. People like Jacob Rees-Mogg aren’t stupid — they have been moving their own assets out of Britain to continue making profits within the EU while the UK struggles along outside it.[17][18]

“The people have spoken”

Now we come to the bigger picture.

AUSTERITY

In the wake of the global financial crisis of 2007–8, the UK and many other countries went into economic recession.

To address the large deficit in government finances, the Conservative Party under David Cameron inflicted a punishing austerity programme on the less well-off, with lower public spending, welfare cuts and frozen benefits.

To qualify for state benefits when out of work, for example, an individual is required to be a full-time job-seeker, spending 35 hours of every week online looking for work. Failure to do so for any reason incurs sanctions or even fines.[19]

Most notoriously, private-sector outfits are being paid public money to deliberately re-assess disability benefit claimants as ‘not disabled’.[20]

Dismantling the welfare state in this way was something many anti-welfare Conservatives had long dreamt of doing.[21] Now they were delighted to be actually getting away with it:

“The genius of David Cameron and George Osborne was that they persuaded the country to accept the most challenging cuts to public spending in our peacetime history without [sparking] riots.”

• JEREMY HUNT, MP, quoted in ‘Jeremy Hunt: the last Cameroon‘ (interview), New Statesman, 17 April 2019.

With growing confidence — and still no riots — David Cameron then began pushing the austerity programme as a permanent feature.[22]

The austerity programme continues unabated, with dire social consequences: food banks; homelessness; reduced life expectancy; reduced policing services; the closure of public libraries; the disposal of public buildings. [23][24][25]

The hardships caused by years of austerity have even come to the attention of the United Nations, whose Human Rights Council sent a special investigator to the UK and then published a damning report:

Although the United Kingdom is the world’s fifth largest economy, one fifth of its population (14 million people) live in poverty…

The bottom line is that much of the glue that has held British society together since the Second World War has been deliberately removed and replaced with a harsh and uncaring ethos.

A booming economy, high employment and a budget surplus have not reversed austerity, a policy pursued more as an ideological than an economic agenda.

• Report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights on his visit to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.Report by Philip Alston. A/HRC/41/39/Add.1. United Nations Human Rights Council. 27 April 2019.

 

[SirGalahad]

THE REFERENDUM

Just as growing numbers of people began to protest against Cameron and his government, along came the EU referendum of 2016. This was seen by many as an opportunity to vent their frustration and punish Cameron.

And since Cameron had appointed himself leader of the ‘Remain’ campaign, the obvious way to vote in protest would be to vote ‘Leave’.[26]

In contrast to Cameron’s low-key, apathetic performance, the two ‘Leave’ campaigns led by Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson were extremely high-profile, well-funded, and relentless. Many disinterested voters suddenly became convinced that their financial woes and social concerns were all the fault of the EU and immigrants.

FRAUD

But the Leave campaigns were also deceitful and fraudulent. In fact, the extensive illegality of the Leave campaigns may well be the biggest ever fraud committed against democracy in modern British history.[27][28]

For example, during the run-up to the EU referendum, Facebook enabled the online ‘digital persuasion’ company Cambridge Analytica to post blatant lies about the EU. The purpose of these was to urge carefully-selected (i.e. emotionally persuadable) Facebook users to vote ‘Leave’. [29]

• Facebook's role in Brexit -- and the threat to democracy — must-see TED talk by investigative journalist Carole Cadwalladr of the Observer.
• See also the shocking Netflix documentary The Great Hack.

And yet despite all this, the actual referendum result cannot be legally challenged. Why? Because the referendum vote was only advisory, like an opinion poll, not mandatory. So even though the referendum is now, in effect, ‘just a massive crime scene’[30] subject to multiple criminal investigations, the result itself cannot be overturned on legal grounds because it has no legal status in the first place.

Despite politicians repeatedly claiming that they've been given a ‘clear mandate’ to leave the EU because ‘the people have spoken’,[31] the Government was (and still is) under no legal obligation whatsoever to act on the result.

So why did they?

Let’s follow the money…

 

[SirGalahad]

WHAT BREXIT WAS REALLY ABOUT ALL ALONG

1 . Tax avoidance

Throughout the world, corporate tax avoidance is a colossal problem.[32]

And by far the biggest enabler of corporate tax avoidance is the UK, with its global network of secretive tax-haven territories:[33]

“Britain has single-handedly done more to undermine world’s tax system than any other nation, report finds… Tax haven territories linked to Britain are responsible for around a third of the world’s corporate tax avoidance risk.”

• ‘UK by far the biggest enabler of global corporate tax dodging, groundbreaking research finds’. Ben Chapman, Independent, 28 May 2019.

Britain itself is badly affected by unpaid corporate tax, yet the Conservative Party has done little to address the matter. This seems particularly galling when we consider that the amount of missing tax payments per year is about the same as the total reduction in welfare spending in the name of austerity (over £30 billion).[34]

THE EU’s CLAMPDOWN ON TAX AVOIDANCE

In 2016 (note the year), the EU published its planned Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive which seeks to tackle the thriving culture of corporate tax avoidance. The directive came into effect in 2019.

Continuing membership of the EU, or just the single market, means that the UK must adopt and enforce this anti-tax avoidance policy on itself.[35]

This obviously impacts all those major companies and business owners who dodge taxes, as well as numerous leaders of poorer countries who are secretively hoarding and laundering money with the help of British offshore banks. [36][37]

A hard Brexit or no-deal Brexit, on the other hand, means business as usual.

This is the plain and simple reason why so many of the most powerful supporters of Brexit — wealthy business tycoons who also happen to be named in the Paradise Papers — suddenly began proclaiming that Britain had to leave the EU, the sooner and harder the better.

As soon as the EU’s tax-avoidance proposal was announced, they set about portraying the EU as the great enemy of Britain, an ‘undemocratic elite’ causing misery for ordinary Brits.

Sadly, many ordinary Brits fell for it.

But then … things didn’t quite work out as planned.

THERESA MAY’S DEAL

After she became Prime Minister, Theresa May spent a long time with other EU national leaders working out an agreed Brexit plan.

But when this huge Withdrawal Agreement finally came out, some of the most prominent Brexiteers were deeply unhappy with it.

Why?

Because at the back of the document there was a commitment by the British Government to retain the EU’s new anti-tax avoidance laws.

Suddenly, the Prime Minister was being branded a ‘traitor’. A column in The Telegraph literally suggested that she was ‘guilty of treason’.[38] [39]

But if another Prime Minister could be found … preferably an unprincipled opportunist who will say and do absolutely anything to get into 10 Downing Street …

… perhaps he could convince the people of Britain that it would be best to just ignore Theresa May’s deal and then simply wait for Britain to crash out of the EU with no deal whatsoever.

And then, literally overnight, there will be no new corporate tax laws for the tax avoiders to worry about.

Better still, with the right PM at the helm, the UK itself could be transformed into a Singapore-style tax haven for the wealthy. This option is now being actively pursued by Boris Johnson’s Government.[40]

But now Brexit offers so much more than just support for tax avoidance…

2. A free-market revolution

Back to the global recession:

Many experts blamed the financial crisis on the US and UK governments’ failure to regulate the increasingly reckless behaviour of their banking and financial sectors. To help protect Europe from the risk of such actions leading to another recession, the EU focused on tightening regulations.

But then came the 2016 EU referendum result and the prospect of the UK actually leaving the EU. For some in the UK, this suddenly opened up a whole new vista of possibilities…

Free-market ideologists believe that market forces and the profit motive are inherently good while any kind of government regulation or public spending is inherently bad.

So immediately after the referendum result, the free-market think-tank the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) announced:

“The weakness of the Labour Party and the resolution of the EU question have created a unique political opportunity to drive through a wide-ranging … revolution on a scale similar to that of the 1980s … This must include removing unnecessary regulatory burdens on businesses, such as those related to climate directives and investment fund.“

• ‘Britain Votes for Brexit: CPS statement‘, Centre for Policy Studies, 24 June 2016.

The vacuum of regulations that would be created by Brexit suddenly presented an opportunity to reshape the entire British economy — minimising the public sector and giving complete free rein to the private sector.

This is another reason why some very powerful financiers have been sponsoring and championing Brexit as a means to deregulate UK business and especially London’s financial centre, the City.

“The majority of money donated to Boris Johnson's campaign [has come] from hedge fund managers and other financiers backing Britain's exit from the European Union, favouring low taxes and the deregulation of the UK economy.”

• ‘Boris Johnson accused of being 'out for himself' after receiving £43,000 for speech backing no-deal Brexit’. Rob Merrick, Independent, 4 July 2019.

Brexit now promises the City free rein by ditching EU regulations once and for all. And with City-friendly politicians now in Government actively pursuing a no-deal Brexit, the UK won’t be adopting any EU-like regulations any time soon. Quite the opposite in fact, as Britain begins kowtowing to US demands. [41]

 

[SirGalahad]

3. Creative destruction / disaster capitalism

It has long between a tenet of left-wing revolutionaries that to create a new society you first have to tear down the old one. In recent years, a similar approach has been adopted by right-wing movements.

Some are those free-market fundamentalists pushing for a completely unregulated economy, while others are all about authoritarian, xenophobic nationalism. The two aren’t necessarily related, but in Brexit they find common ground for ‘creative destruction’.

THE FAR RIGHT

The EU has brought decades of unprecedented multi-national cooperation, peace and social progress. For some, this is intolerable.

For example, Steve Bannon, former campaign advisor to Donald Trump, would like to see the EU torn down and be replaced by Trump-style nationalism and xenophobia. Despite being an American citizen, Bannon has been actively promoting far-right parties across Europe — including the UK’s BNP, the EDL, Ukip, and anything to do with Nigel Farage. [42][43][44]

Bannon is also the former Vice President of Cambridge Analytica.

DISASTER CAPITALISM

Equally destructive, William Rees-Mogg (Jacob’s father) actually wrote a book describing the financial benefits of social collapse and economic crisis for a few astute investors. The book makes it pretty clear why Jacob — recently promoted to Leader of the House of Commons by Boris Johnson — not only craves Brexit, but also the economic pain that is likely to come with it.

• ‘How to explain Jacob Rees-Mogg? Start with his father's books’. Andy Beckett, The Guardian, 9 Nov 2018.

In the Information Age, according to William Rees-Mogg (or ‘Mystic Mogg’ as Private Eye called him), all nations, governments, social services and even democracy itself will collapse. Finally, no more taxes! No more propping up the poor and the sick! And then, out of the inevitable violence and carnage to come when the masses turn on each other, only the most capable and self-interested investors will inherit the Earth.

“There is a reason why the hard Brexiteers cannot coherently explain their vision of Brexit: their chief aim is to break as many things as possible, in the belief that from the rubble might arise a kind of flag-waving, small-state, free-market utopia that even the blessed Margaret might have found unpalatable.”

• ‘Rich, reckless Brexit zealots are fighting a new class war’, John Harris, The Guardian, 6 Aug 2018.

This is why proponents of a free-market revolution don’t care about the harm caused by austerity and won’t care about the damage caused by Brexit. Shortages simply mean high demand and higher prices. Deregulation simply means giving the greedy greater freedom to exploit the needy.

Naomi Klein, in her 2007 book The Shock Doctrine, refers to this deeply cynical and toxic ideology as ‘disaster capitalism’.

But why sit around waiting for a natural disaster or economic shock to come along when you can covertly engineer one yourself?

4. Hedge funds — Betting against Britain

Hedge fund managers are investors who gamble on the economy. They place bets on any economic value that might rise or (ideally) fall, such as the value of sterling. The world is just one big casino to them, and any humanitarian disaster or economic crisis is simply a good bet — an opportunity to make a killing.

Some of the leading Brexiteers who have long claimed that leaving the EU will lead to enormous dividends for the UK are, in fact, hedge fund investors seeking enormous dividends for themselves.

They are poised to profit from the inevitable uncertainty and chaos, especially from a no-deal Brexit.

“What to do if you are a hedge fund manager down to your last billion? Answer: rig global politics in your favour. If that sounds improbable, remember we are talking about folk capable of shorting* the entire Japanese economy in response to a natural disaster. Hedge fund managers are megalomaniacs. It goes with the territory.”

• ‘Boris, Brexit and the Hedge Funds (Part 1)’ George Keravan, Bella Caledonia, 11 July 2019.

One of the new EU directives designed to regulate the financial sector, the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (2011), focused on the worst excesses of unscrupulous hedge funds. It addressed everything from their secrecy to how much managers could pay themselves in bonuses.

"The adoption of the directive means that hedge funds and private equity will no longer operate in a regulatory void outside the scope of supervisors. The new regime brings transparency and security to the way these funds are managed and operate, which adds to the overall stability of our financial system."

• ‘European Commission statement at the occasion of the European Parliament vote on the directive on hedge funds and private equity‘, Press release (MEMO/10/573), European Commission, 11 Nov 2010.

Hedge fund managers in London, who had been used to operating as freewheeling rogues outside the system, took exception to this and began clamouring for Britain to leave the EU. The clamouring increased in 2015 after they were fined by the Greek government for interfering with the struggling Greek economy. Since then they have been actively sponsoring Leave campaigns as well as sponsoring Boris Johnson to push for ‘no deal’.

One of these hedge fund managers is Crispin Odey.

Odey routinely bets against the British economy — if UK stocks and share values go down, or if a British business goes bankrupt as he predicted, he wins.

He made £220 million after successfully betting that a Leave result would cause the pound to crash. But then, he had also donated almost £900,000 to the Vote Leave campaign to help get the desired result.

After Theresa May’s downfall, Odey donated £10,000 to Boris Johnson’s leadership campaign. He then began publicly calling for people to support Boris Johnson’s no-deal Brexit strategy as the best possible way ahead for Britain.

‘Theresa May wasted three years,’ he said. ‘The only optimism about anything lies in supporting Boris.’[45]

Yet Odey has placed a £300 million bet on a no-deal Brexit leading to disaster for British companies — but another staggering windfall for himself.[46]

“Odey’s apparent lack of confidence in flagship British firms stands in marked contrast to his fund’s investments in other countries, including France, Germany and the US, where he is mainly backing shares to rise.”

• ‘Brexiteer Odey bets £500m AGAINST British businesses’, Neil Craven & Jamie Nimmo, The Mail On Sunday, 10 June 2018.

It’s as if Brexit is just a means for predators to isolate the UK from the safety of the herd.

And with so many wealthy businessmen sponsoring government ministers to produce the hardest Brexit possible purely for their own financial gain, it really begs the question — who is the current government actually working for?

“Brexit is not a cry for help from the English underclass. It is a carefully stage-managed campaign by global finance capital in the form of the hedge funds. It is being orchestrated out of hedge fund self-interest and the greed of billionaires. Boris Johnson is their front man.”

• ‘Boris, Brexit and the Hedge Funds (Part 1)’, George Keravan, Bella Caledonia, 11 July 2019

 

[SirGalahad]

Conclusion

• Brexit is essentially a coup pulled off at the behest of tax-dodging corporations and misanthropic investors.
• Their only concern for ‘taking back control’ is to rid their own businesses of EU tax laws, financial regulations and employee rights.
• They have been systematically misleading the British public to hate the EU through a constant supply of anti-EU propaganda and lies.
• They are sponsoring their friends and collaborators in the Conservative Party to bring about a no-deal Brexit.
• They are on course to instigate social and economic changes that will turn the UK (or what’s left of it) into an enormous cash cow for their own self-interest.
• They are abusing democracy to create a plutocracy.

 

[SirGalahad]

Further reading

2015

• EU referendum: Hedge fund managers backing 'Out' campaign set to make millions from Brexit. Michael Bow, The Independent, 25 Oct 2015.

2016

• Boris Johnson peddled absurd EU myths – and our disgraceful press followed his lead. Martin Fletcher, New Statesman, 1 July 2016.
• Margaret Thatcher didn’t cause Brexit – but Brexit will bring back Thatcherism. Andy Beckett, The Guardian, 1 July 2016.
• Disaster capitalism: the shocking doctrine Tories can’t wait to unleash.Howard Hotson, The Guardian, 4 July 2016.

2017

• Brexit is a monumental act of self-harm which will bewilder historians. Paddy Ashdown, The Independent, 29 March 2017.
• The great British Brexit robbery: how our democracy was hijacked. Carole Cadwalladr, The Observer, 7 May 2017.
• Brexit: disaster capitalism. Richard North, EU Referendum, 13 July 2017.
• How Brexit Was Engineered by Foreign Billionaires to Bring About Economic Chaos - for Profit. Graham Vanbergen, Global Research, Oct 2017.
• No wonder John Redwood backs Brexit. He will make money out of it, after all . Joris Luyendijk, The Guardian, 14 Nov 2017.

2018

• Five Times Millionaire Brexiteers Advised Businesses On How To Get Round Brexit. Owen Bennett, Huffington Post, 28 June 2018.
• Trump's visit marks the start of shock doctrine Brexit. Adam Ramsay, OpenDemocracy, 13 July 2018.
• Downing Street Denies Being In Rees-Mogg's Pocket After Accepting Hard Brexit Changes To Trade Bill. Owen Bennett, Huffington Post, 16 July 2018.
• Why Brexit is really about competing visions of capitalism. Craig Berry, The Conversation, 26 July 2018.
• Rich, reckless Brexit zealots are fighting a new class war. John Harris, The Guardian, 6 Aug 2018.
• The most important book you have never heard of, may explain Rees-Mogg love of hard Brexit - Alastair Campbell (alastaircampbell.org), 13 Aug 2018.
• Hillary Clinton: ‘Brexit could be biggest self-inflicted wound in history’. Patrick Wintour, The Guardian, 10 Oct 2018.
• How to explain Jacob Rees-Mogg? Start with his father's books. Andy Beckett, The Guardian, 9 Nov 2018.
• Hedge funds make big bets against post-Brexit UK economy. Jasper Jolly, The Guardian, 10 Dec 2018.
• Britain’s Brexit crisis was entirely self-inflicted. Catherine Haddon, Washington Post, 14 Dec 2018.

2019

• Why disaster capitalists are praying for a no-deal Brexit. George Monbiot, The Guardian, 7 Feb 2019.
• The Disaster Capitalism Club part 1: Vote Leave Backers Who Made Billions from Brexit. Peter Jukes, Byline Times, 13 March 2019.
• Brexit – Now Just a Massive National Crime Scene. Graham Vanbergen, Global Research, 17 April 2019.
• Why are so many Brexiteer politicians cosying up to this Armenian oligarch? Thomas Rowley, OpenDemocracy, 24 May 2019.
• Threat of no-deal Brexit ‘like shooting your foot off’. The Irish Times, 14 June 2019.
• Brexit has heaped pain on UK economy and more damage is highly likely, researchers warn. Olesya Dmitracova, The Independent, 24 June 2019.
• The return of disaster capitalism. Grace Blakeley, New Statesman, 3 July 2019.
• Boris, Brexit and the Hedge Funds (Part 1) George Keravan, Bella Caledonia, 11 July 2019.
• Boris Johnson’s vow for a ‘no-deal Brexit’ is a complete fallacy – we would need deals galore just to keep afloat. Ed Davey, The Independent, 14 July 2019.
• How Boris Johnson's Brussels-bashing stories shaped British politics. Jennifer Rankin & Jim Waterson, The Guardian, 14 July 2019.
• Project fear? The last three years have been more catastrophic than even the most pessimistic Remainer predicted. Jonathan Lis, Prospect Magazine, 19 July 2019.
• Boris, Brexit and the Hedge Funds (Part 2). George Keravan, Bella Caledonia, 22 July 2019.
• The disaster capitalists are lurking over No 10. Peter Geoghegan, The National, 28 July 2019.
• Cambridge Analytica worked on Brexit campaign, emails claim. Rowland Manthorpe, Sky Nrws, 31 July 2019.
• Academic warns of a 'furnace of ultra-neoliberal free trade deals' after Brexit. John McEvoy, The Canary, 2 Aug 2019.
• New trade minister Liz Truss had private talks in US with libertarian groups. Michael Savage, The Observer, 4 Aug 2019.
• Boris Johnson’s donor Crispin Odey eyes Brexit jackpot with £300m bet against British firms. Caroline Wheeler and Rosamund Urwin, Sunday TImes, 4 Aug 2019.

 

[ellal]

"Why are Remainers so convinced that staying in the European Union is what is best for the UK?"

Because it is...

And quitters are too stupid to understand that...

End of!

 

[durhamplumber]

"Club membership also comes with a number of rules and regulations, which are constantly evolving ...."
CORRRECT.In favour of other countries...1 reason we ARE leaving..Read the Observer if you want more Remainer back slapping confirmation bias of your biased views...Newsflash...We leaving EU...you missed the boat.

 

[JohnD]

"Club membership also comes with a number of rules and regulations, which are constantly evolving ...."
CORRRECT.In favour of...

In favour of the members, of which UK is still one of the largest and most influential, although Buffoon has now ordered UK to abandon its activities and has given away our votes.

When we resign, we will give up our vote in the chamber, our seats in the council, and our membership of the committees.

So Brexit will cut off our power and influence.

Great move, dumbos.

 

[SirGalahad]

"Club membership also comes with a number of rules and regulations, which are constantly evolving ...."
CORRRECT.In favour of other countries...1 reason we ARE leaving..Read the Observer if you want more Remainer back slapping confirmation bias of your biased views...Newsflash...We leaving EU...you missed the boat.

Eurospectic politicians and newspapers are fond of referring to the officials of the European Union as ‘unelected bureaucrats’ or ‘eurocrats’, suggesting that these unaccountable officials make decisions that affect our lives.

In fact, the EU is run democratically by two bodies:

• the Council of the EU — a regular get-together of government ministers from each of the EU member states;
• the European Parliament — an assembly of 751 directly-elected MEPs representing their constituencies.

A third body, the European Commission consists of over 30,000 civil servants whose job is to administer EU laws. It is overseen by 28 Commissioners, one nominated by each member state.

While it is technically correct that the Commission’s civil servants are “unelected bureaucrats”, the same is true of all civil servants everywhere.

What is grossly incorrect is the idea that Europe is “governed” or “run” by these civil servants. This misconception may be due to the fact that it’s the Commission’s job to propose and implement new EU-wide legislation. But it does so only in an administrative capacity.

The Commission’s purpose is to keep EU-wide legislation consistent with policies adopted by the other bodies. Here’s how that works:

 

[Notch7]

a number of rules and regulations, which are constantly evolving ...."
CORRRECT.In favour of other countries..

So when the EU adopted various British standards to become European standards whilst consulting UK experts.....that was in favour of other countries.

Margaret Thatcher was the key architect in the single market.
So its our single market
DP wants us to leave something we developed.

 

[ellal]

DP wants us to leave something we developed.

dp simply doesn't understand that