The benefits of Brexit - the future of the United Kingdom

[Doran754]

Well, the UK can now do whatever it wants (well, more things) to support business and workers as it saves people. Some of their former colonies have some ideas on that. That neither party cares is up to you.
Covid will still ravage your country, but that was always a choice. You might get your wish by not living anymore.

With Brexit promising to further impede Britons travelling overseas next year, Portugal is working on all kinds of ways it can ‘bring back the numbers’ to ‘save’ the nation’s tourism.

In a recent interview with the UK’s Daily Telegraph newspaper, Portuguese ambassador to the UK Manuel Lobo Antunes said the country is preparing to “do whatever we can to continue to make Portugal attractive to British citizens, for tourism or permanent residence”.

Reasserting the ‘UK passport holder lines’ at airports and the health passports (devised to make up for the loss of the European Health Insurance Cards) (click here), Mr Antunes added the idea of ‘visa-free stays’.

Try and hold back those tears fella, we'll still come and prop up your country's economy like we do every year.

https://movingtoportugal.org.uk/news/portugal-pins-hopes-on-post-brexit-tourism-strategy/

 

[Nightwish]

Try and hold back those tears fella, we'll still come and prop up your country's economy like we do every year.

My tears of... wanting to be made clear neither the Euro, nor the single market is necessary for a successful open economy, as well as the stupidity of believing in the collapse prone tourism industry as a path to comply with treaties? Even with Boris at the helm. Just take care of your health first and foremost.
No, what I have tears for is the consequence of believing that the EU is about anything but the free movement of capital, but that's a whole other thing.

 

[smf]

I'd thought to myself that Brexit would "save" Britain

Brexit was all about taking the power away from democratically elected and put into the hands of rich people. It was never about saving Britain.

We've gone from having the best deal possible with our closest trading partner, to a terrible one. A lot of businesses are struggling with the new requirements, including fishermen.

We could have made more effort trading with other countries when we were in the EU, but we don't have the industry to do it.

 

[FGFlann]

That said, the new immigration laws of Brexit are great, though due to the lockdowns which affects people's lives then it sort of cancels everything. Small business owners might as well forget about opening their business there.

Slightly stricter immigration controls aren't sufficient to make any real impact on Britain as it is today. The lockdown sucks but it will end because there is no realistic alternative. There are more measures which need to be taken in addition to curbs on immigration if the process is to mean anything at all. My hot take is that there is far too much focus on financial matters and not enough on social issues. More than anything Britain needs social cohesion. To this end; cultural integration of existing immigrant populations that are isolating themselves needs to become a priority, along with measures to end the ghetto-isation of inner cities. In short one should get their own house in order before worrying about approaching the neighbours. Political polarization is also something I'm increasingly worried about as Britain continues to adopt the American brand of dishonest grievance culture. I'm struggling to think of a solution to the latter problem as it's woven into the institutions of media and government and would require them to be honest with the people and themselves, which is quite possibly the biggest ask for politicians, pundits, and activists alike.

 

[FAST6191]

Slightly stricter immigration controls aren't sufficient to make any real impact on Britain as it is today. The lockdown sucks but it will end because there is no realistic alternative. There are more measures which need to be taken in addition to curbs on immigration if the process is to mean anything at all. My hot take is that there is far too much focus on financial matters and not enough on social issues. More than anything Britain needs social cohesion. To this end; cultural integration of existing immigrant populations that are isolating themselves needs to become a priority, along with measures to end the ghetto-isation of inner cities. In short one should get their own house in order before worrying about approaching the neighbours. Political polarization is also something I'm increasingly worried about as Britain continues to adopt the American brand of dishonest grievance culture. I'm struggling to think of a solution to the latter problem as it's woven into the institutions of media and government and would require them to be honest with the people and themselves, which is quite possibly the biggest ask for politicians, pundits, and activists alike.

Is there no alternative to lock down?
What is the cost, what is the effect (good and bad)? Some say such measures should only be used if there needs to a be a little bit of time bought to reconfigure hospitals that were caught on the wrong foot.
Few seem to want to run numbers here and what I am seeing says they are making it up as they go along.

The rest of that is something to ponder though.

I don't know that I would necessarily go after the ghettos first, though certainly not ignore them, as much as reign in London and the devolved parliaments (though they are different approaches needed there -- London mostly alienates everybody while the devolved parliaments... basically hotbeds of separatism*) if the goal is some flavour of national unity and cohesion. Don't know that the current offering of big train line on the west coast and some free ports oop north will do much of anything though.

*if the UK can't stay the UK then it matters little whether Birmingham is a hole. Equally if you can't make the SNP and plaid cymru look like fools then I would question whether they are fit for the job, and possibly how you managed to dress yourself that morning. Northern Ireland represents a marginally different problem (while I don't necessarily think much of the DUP, Sinn Fein, SDLD and UUP they have variously more going on, have not paid much attention to APNI but that might have been a shortcoming on my part) but same general goal. On the other hand kicking out Scotland is not the worst choice on the economics front even if it would be sad for the Scottish people as a whole (I actually like them as a general rule, watching the SNP implode things has popcorn appeal but if doing something vaguely humanitarian for once in my life... no thanks).

 

[FGFlann]

Perhaps I was unclear but my intention was to state that there is no realistic alternative but to end the lockdowns. Keeping this up in perpetuity won't work, people already disobey the rules and the longer it goes on more will start ignoring rules until they lose all meaning. Whether they were necessary at all or not is another matter, but I lean towards no.

I wouldn't necessarily advocate Scottish independence but if its people voted for it, I would not stand against their wish. That said, the devolved parliaments were definitely a mistake. One of the biggest mistakes Britain ever made was making even more layers of government that serve no constructive purpose. Just like the EU itself, they are resource black holes that do little but sew discontent as if we didn't already have enough of it. I would whole heartedly support any movement that would see both the Welsh assembly and the Scottish parliament dissolved permanently.

I must admit that Northern Ireland is largely an enigma to me. Despite being a part of the UK we hear almost nothing about it, almost as if the rest of the country are afraid to talk about it.

 

[smf]

Perhaps I was unclear but my intention was to state that there is no realistic alternative but to end the lockdowns. Keeping this up in perpetuity won't work, people already disobey the rules and the longer it goes on more will start ignoring rules until they lose all meaning. Whether they were necessary at all or not is another matter, but I lean towards no.

Yeah, people are idiots. What will probably happen is stronger lockdown.

Like how you don't give up trying to stop a puppy shitting on the carpet, just because the puppy wants to shit on the carpet.

 

[FGFlann]

Yeah, people are idiots. What will probably happen is stronger lockdown.

Like how you don't give up trying to stop a puppy shitting on the carpet, just because the puppy wants to shit on the carpet.

Your analogy completely ignores the agency of the people involved and the reality of the situation. They are not pets or livestock, they will not respond to authority and captivity in the same way a puppy will. Likewise you cannot stop the spread of this virus. It is too late for that. Eventually everyone is going to have to get used to the idea that it is endemic and never going away, and we will have to learn to live with it the same we live with cold and flu.

 

[smf]

Is there no alternative to lock down?

At this point I'd say no, the messaging from the government has been absolutely terrible. For the last year we've had people whinging about freedom and common sense.

We waited until it was too late to go into the first lockdown and then paid people to go out and be super spreaders. This is all the fault of the people desperate to end lockdown.

Your analogy completely ignores the agency of the people involved and the reality of the situation.

You are ignoring the reality of the situation. Agency of the people? The people have no clue what they are doing, it's arrogance to suggest otherwise.

Eventually everyone is going to have to get used to the idea that it is endemic and never going away, and we will have to learn to live with it the same we live with cold and flu.

It's not about learning, it's about getting everyone vaccinated. But then there are the liars going round saying that vaccines will turn you into a 5G antennae and Bill Gates is injecting you with a GPS tracker, that are trying to fuck that up too. Because people are idiots.

They look like they are going to throw us to the wolves after the vulnerable have been vaccinated, which still leaves a lot of people transmitting the virus and increasing the chance of a more potent mutation. So lockdown is only going to be for another few months anyway. Time will tell whether lifting lockdown that early will be another mistake caused by arrogant people being idiots.

 

[FGFlann]

You are ignoring the reality of the situation. Agency of the people? The people have no clue what they are doing, it's arrogance to suggest otherwise.

What unbelievable projection. You are tacitly deciding that *all* people cannot make decisions for themselves then claiming that it is others who are arrogant? Shall I fetch you a fedora to tip? Maybe a blade to study? Get a grip on your ego.

 

[FAST6191]

From where I sit

Loss of schooling
Loss of social life
Loss of business large, small and incidental.
Loss of funds from government pools of money that do good stuff otherwise.
General side effects of sitting in the house -- whether it is becoming fat bastards, bouncing each other off the wall because no personal space or generally just bastards.
Lack of diagnosis options for other serious illness.
Right to run around, taking the risks you will or won't, is generally recognised is one enjoyed by those in free countries. Not something that should be surrendered lightly as a general matter of principle.

Handful of old people and sick people that might well have been able to hide out anyway kicking the bucket a few years ahead of best case. When it was an unknown then numbers might have been higher, today we have had enough cases vs deaths/serious negative long term outcomes to make as good a model as we have for almost any disease in the modern world.
Those that don't die might end up costing resources.
Long term some unknowns as to what goes.
More cases, more risk of a mutation worth noting (more deadly, more spreadable by whatever means).

Efficacy of lockdown both in theory, numbers shown (we have nice data for a regression analysis right now if you want) and reality -- compliance rates is a factor in all medication type scenarios (if you can't not drink then no liver transplant, if you can't take care of yourself then again transplants and treatments get altered, if you can't draw blood and titrate new levels hourly then probably going to be in hospital or specialist facilities...).

Right now we seem to have a nice

"They are working the numbers are dropping"

"They are not working people are going outside"

Seems like a damned if you do, damned if you don't type deal there.


Run me a proper risk, reward cost-benefit type analysis such that we might be able to quibble our corner for our respective risk tolerances. Lives saved is certainly nice but not at any price, indeed there already appears to be some assignment of the value of lives. Quite happy to have benefits if vaccination efficacy and schedule can be determined be a factor in this as well and the delta there makes sense. As it stands though if they suddenly determined "oh wow look two doses of saline a week apart acts as basically 100% inoculation" then what would that timeframe be -- 60 million people in the country, however many minutes per setup but can be administered by any medic (how many of those exist?), 120 million needles needed (big but probably doable, call it 150 to account for droppages and make distribution easier), might be able to skimp and use disposable ends though. Running that and it is not a short process even in that kind of best case pondered there, how many doses can be produced, what the practical efficacy is (I am seeing rather low numbers for some of them, even if net positive) distributed and given (even before we have those that think it might give them lizard change abilities/the mark of the beast/infertility*, actual medical reasons not to -- 1.8-2.0% allergic to eggs for one, or just care to wait for v3 for fear corners were cut) will likely only make that harder. Numbers administered already are not that high (600k is a lot, but in terms of population if rates do need to be 90% or more still means next winter. Potential to ramp up distribution given that there were months to put it in place already as trials looked certain could make more but how much is realistic here? Is then waiting for some measure of vaccination level worth the tradeoff?

*never mind that a two injection long term infertility causing treatment would be worth a bloody fortune rather than having to do tubal ligation or vasectomy.

As nobody appears to be doing that then I am left to question the merits of things until such time as someone does, and ponder whatever scraps of information I might get and put it into models I am not necessarily the best equipped to ponder.
Being told shut up it is good for you by people that I would normally not trust to organise a piss up in a brewery, read a map or hold my pint while I tie my shoe, never mind the demonstrable evidence of their incompetence at any number of things does not inspire confidence in words.

 

[smf]

You are tacitly deciding that *all* people cannot make decisions for themselves then claiming that it is others who are arrogant?

Well yes, because it's not arrogant to follow the advice to go into lockdown. It's arrogant to think that lockdown should be ended because you're special & can somehow avoid covid19. It's magical thinking to the extreme against all evidence.

Loss of schooling

The quality of schooling in the UK, especially in deprived areas, they aren't missing much.
They knew what was coming over a year ago, they should have planned for online learning.

Loss of social life

You can do this on the phone and online. It sucks, but then dying sucks too.

Loss of business large, small and incidental.
Loss of funds from government pools of money that do good stuff otherwise.

Financially this has been a huge hit of course, but then there are financial costs to large amounts of people dying too. I'm not sure any politician wants to have blood on their hands.

General side effects of sitting in the house -- whether it is becoming fat bastards, bouncing each other off the wall because no personal space or generally just bastards.

You only have yourself to blame, you don't have to sit in the house.

Lack of diagnosis options for other serious illness.

This isn't a fault of the lockdown, but the hospitals being overrun by covid19. Cancer treatment is still ongoing in some areas, but some are being shut down now due to being overrun by covid19. Ending lockdown now would accelerate this.

Right to run around, taking the risks you will or won't, is generally recognised is one enjoyed by those in free countries.

You may as well try using that argument for drink driving. It should be up to you whether you take the risk getting behind the wheel drunk or not, right? No police man should arrest you.

 

[FAST6191]

The quality of schooling in the UK, especially in deprived areas, they aren't missing much.
They knew what was coming over a year ago, they should have planned for online learning.



You can do this online.



Financially this has been a huge hit of course, but then there are financial costs to large amounts of people dying too.

I'm not sure any politician wants to have blood on their hands.



You only have yourself to blame, you don't have to sit in the house.



This isn't a fault of the lockdown, but the hospitals being overrun by covid19. Cancer treatment is still ongoing in some areas, but some are being shut down now due to being overrun by covid19. Ending lockdown now would accelerate this.



If you could guarantee that you would not infect someone even if you didn't know that you were infected and would sign something that said that we wouldn't treat you or support your family if you died then sure.

Most of those seem rather trite dismissals.

Schools have many failings, can have a nice long talk on those. Still does not mean I am inclined to diss them entirely.

Online socialising most trick cyclist types would say is rather lacking compared to face to face, hard to achieve for some as well.

Politicians would have blood on their hands either way. Avoiding having someone young bounced off the wall and having a less than pleasant life/few years vs some 80 year old not making it to 82. Debate as to which is more preferable from where I sit.

Similarly there are costs to death, would have liked the option to weigh them up myself or see the rationales used to determine what cost to bear.

Yet if I am only supposed to go out to the supermarket and for my "daily act of exercise" (a bizarre notion from where I sit but OK) then the effects are predictable. Depending upon the age range then long term consequences that might have been dodged are also a thing in this.

So build more treatment locations -- I am sure the billions spunked away already could have done more, and all those nice overflow places appear to be virtual ghost towns. Could also change the barriers for treatment and say bugger off home/to hospice/to simple isolation as you are fucked anyway.

That final one seems like a harsh option. Risk-reward cost-benefit could swing something another way while still making a dent.

 

[smf]

So build more treatment locations -- I am sure the billions spunked away already could have done more, and all those nice overflow places appear to be virtual ghost towns.

They are using some of the nightingale hospitals, they don't have staff for the rest. It takes years to train staff & the uk isn't particularly good at producing nurses.

We struggled even when we had free movement of workers from the EU, but even that option has unfortunately been thrown away now.

 

[FGFlann]

Well yes, because it's not arrogant to follow the advice to go into lockdown. It's arrogant to think that lockdown should be ended because you're special & can somehow avoid covid19. It's magical thinking to the extreme against all evidence.

There's no point in getting mad about people who aren't even a part of the conversation. You can go out there in a hazmat suit with a megaphone and look for lockdown violators to yell at if it'll make you feel better, but it's not going to change the fact that people will eventually revolt against any long term lockdown as they keep realizing the risk to their long term health is negligible. It's going to end one way or another.

 

[smf]

There's no point in getting mad about people who aren't even a part of the conversation. You can go out there in a hazmat suit with a megaphone and look for lockdown violators to yell at if it'll make you feel better, but it's not going to change the fact that people will eventually revolt against any long term lockdown as they keep realizing the risk to their long term health is negligible. It's going to end one way or another.

Well you and they share the same mentality, so I don't think it's wasted.

It would have been over a whole lot quicker if everyone had stuck with it, but Boris fucked that up.

What we can't do now is open everything up, so the quicker you and everyone gets back on board the sooner it will be over.

It's like a drug addict going through withdrawal, all the time you keep going for hits it's just going to take you long. Cold turkey is the only way.

 

[FGFlann]

Well you and they share the same mentality, so I don't think it's wasted.

Bullshit. You have no idea what measures I've been taking or the positions I've been advocating for regarding covid restrictions because you haven't even bothered to ask. The only thing I've proposed is that the lockdown is going to end because people will rebel in the long term, which is a prediction not a call to action. You are tilting at windmills.

 

[smf]

Bullshit. You have no idea what measures I've been taking or the positions I've been advocating for regarding covid restrictions because you haven't even bothered to ask. The only thing I've proposed is that the lockdown is going to end because people will rebel in the long term, which is a prediction not a call to action. You are tilting at windmills.

The lockdown will end because of the vaccine, not because some self important people want it to end. The early may bank holiday is the current prediction, but obviously they could miss that if people keep being idiots.

Categorically if there is some kind of civil unrest because they can't go to the pub in the meantime, then measures will be taken.

Most of those seem rather trite dismissals.

Your arguments are trite and disingenuous, so who wins?

Quite happy to have benefits if vaccination efficacy and schedule can be determined be a factor in this as well and the delta there makes sense. As it stands though if they suddenly determined "oh wow look two doses of saline a week apart acts as basically 100% inoculation" then what would that timeframe be -- 60 million people in the country, however many minutes per setup but can be administered by any medic (how many of those exist?), 120 million needles needed (big but probably doable, call it 150 to account for droppages and make distribution easier), might be able to skimp and use disposable ends though. Running that and it is not a short process even in that kind of best case pondered there, how many doses can be produced, what the practical efficacy is (I am seeing rather low numbers for some of them, even if net positive) distributed and given (even before we have those that think it might give them lizard change abilities/the mark of the beast/infertility*, actual medical reasons not to -- 1.8-2.0% allergic to eggs for one, or just care to wait for v3 for fear corners were cut) will likely only make that harder. Numbers administered already are not that high (600k is a lot, but in terms of population if rates do need to be 90% or more still means next winter. Potential to ramp up distribution given that there were months to put it in place already as trials looked certain could make more but how much is realistic here? Is then waiting for some measure of vaccination level worth the tradeoff?

*never mind that a two injection long term infertility causing treatment would be worth a bloody fortune rather than having to do tubal ligation or vasectomy.

What?

 

[FGFlann]

The lockdown will end because of the vaccine, not because some self important people want it to end.

Categorically if there is some kind of civil unrest because they can't go to the pub in the meantime, then measures will be taken.

The lockdown can end because of any number of factors, that's not the point and never was the point. You've taken a hypothetical about public reaction to a hypothetical extended lockdown and decided to tell us all how very mad you are at people who are breaking lockdown restrictions. The thread is clearly not about the lockdown, and we obviously both agree that the lockdown will end one way or another, so why are we going on this pointless tangent?

 

[smf]

The lockdown can end because of any number of factors, that's not the point and never was the point. You've taken a hypothetical about public reaction to a hypothetical extended lockdown and decided to tell us all how very mad you are at people who are breaking lockdown restrictions. The thread is clearly not about the lockdown, and we obviously both agree that the lockdown will end one way or another, so why are we going on this pointless tangent?

The question was asked if there was an alternative and I gave the reasons for why there wasn't.

The rest was aimed at the bullshit free society comments