People who supported Brexit - do you feel conned?

You have no idea how it looks considering the new government isn't yet in place and negotiations haven't started. Nor do I, so I will wait and see.

Ok, so say you have a job which is linked to the EU.

Would you be feeling totally secure in your employment right now?

What is your point?

Obviously, if your job is linked to EU Trade and trade barriers in EU Trade go up then clearly there is a risk of a job loss. No one is saying that the job will be lost.

Yes, as the jobs are linked to trade, and as David Cameron himself said, even out of the EU the trading would still go on.

Trade barriers won't be imposed.

Trade barriers won't be imposed.

Yeah, it does. However, the difference is that the political nature of the EU invalidates our parliament, as they could turn around, say "no" and pass legislation to veto the law, because of the supremacy of EU law. I fully expected a recession when I voted, I would rather my country be poor and free than rich and enslaved.

Exactly this lol. People such as my Grandma voted over 40 years ago for a free common market. Not a political union with aspirations for an EU army. THEY'RE the ones that were conned.

No they can't veto anything - what supremacy of EU law means is the European court is court of last appeal - which is good because parliamentary supremacy means there is absolutely no checks on parliament.
We had a veto on most EU legislation we deemed to be against our interest, we also had membership of the EU parliament, our government appointed our commissioners, and our ministers sat in the European council. That is anything but undemocratic or 'enslaved".


You mean when they voted to stay in a union whose very first treaty's very first clause was "Determined to lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe", whose second article declared "The Community shall have as its task, by establishing a common market and an economic and monetary union", whose purpose was specified to include " the abolition, as between Member States, of the obstacles to the free movement of persons, services and capital", " the application of procedures which shall make it possible to co-ordinate the economic policies of Member States [...]", and latter goes on set out the assembly, council, commission and courts.
Seriously? If that passes for "just free common market", we still "only have free common market".

So you want an unelected institution which can propose laws to turn around and say no to a national government? We didn't have veto over all though, did we? EU parliament was ceremonial, they can't propose bills can they? Can they rescind laws either?

Regardless of what you say, we still have this situation. And it looks set that we will continue to.

Weren't you one of the people who said you weren't feeling conned? How so when you seem so worked up about one of the things which Leave have abandoned?

Well, it's also a political union because it has laws that are applied across all member countries and can dictate decisions to member countries.

I'm not feeling conned. We abandoned the EU parliament yes, what are you getting at?

Regardless, the EU is planning on becoming a state now. I dont believe in the way the EU is set up so either we had remained and changed everything about its structure or left.

Bottom line is for me personally, no I do not feel conned, and if I could go back and vote to leave again, I wouldn't hesitate.

Ok. So you were going on about unelected people calling shots and proposing laws which we had to follow. You seemed angry about this.

Boris Johnson - who is the man very likely to lead the government and our negotiations with the EU has indicated that he wouldn't change the things you mentioned.

He said that he'd like to see the UK in the single market. And the EU said that would mean we have to accept their rules and laws.

So since nothing seems to be changing about the thing you are unhappy with, I figured that you'd have felt slightly unhappy.



But it doesn't look like we are going to leave, does it? (read above)

Racism would have only gotten worse even if we had stayed, since people are starting to get sick of people taking their jobs, raping their women and occupying their social housing. Now I am not working class, but I understand that nobody deserves to see their society decay like that. The racist incidents are understandable backlash, even if I disagree with them.

My defense of my decision? The ability for us to make laws again without the looming spectre of an undemocratic institution proposing and passing legislation to annul it.

So you want an unelected institution which can propose laws to turn around and say no to a national government? We didn't have veto over all though, did we? EU parliament was ceremonial, they can't propose bills can they? Can they rescind laws either?

I don't really see how leaving the EU helps any of that, given that there's every likelihood that free movement agreements with the remainder of the EU could continue remain in place.

In my opinion these are the result of more fundamental issues in society than can be solved by just putting up some borders anyway. If immigrants are taking "their" jobs so easily, clearly employers are getting a better deal from employing them and our workforce isn't competitive enough. If immigrants are occupying "their" social housing, clearly we've set up a system in which people (immigrant or not) develop an over reliance on social housing. I'm not really aware of any widespread problem of EU migrants committing rape.



What kind of laws are you wanting us to make, that we couldn't have already made under the EU?

They were never unelected.
People elected the parliament (more democratically than in UK I might add). Parliament was not ceremonial because it had authority over actually passing laws - yes it could not propose them but that is minor caveat which does not make it 'ceremonial' when it has power to say "nope that bill ain't happening".Also given they control the purse strings, they have significant degree of power (ie. if Parliament demands commission introduce a bill and commission doesn't, parliament could literally say 'you ain't getting money until you introduce that bill'. They also approve appointment of the commission, much like how PM (and ministers) are appointed by the parliament.

Council is basically collection of national ministers meeting on various stuff; again given they are members of national government they are presumably democratically elected.

Now to more controversial commission; they are approved by the parliament which we voted, and every member of the commission is appointed by a democratically elected national government. They are the ones proposing the laws, but given they are accountable to the parliament and the commissioners themselves are accountable to national parliament, again no more unelected than our ministers..Probably the reason it is unpopular is because once laws are passed by the parliament, they are the ones tasked with enforcing it so when we hear "EU commission demands whatever", fact that it was approved by the democratically elected parliament is disguised.

Yes it is a slightly different system to the parliamentary system here, that does not mean it is is any less democratic.

Erm, yes he will. He will invoke article 50 and we will leave. From what I can tell, the single market only covers immigration. It doesn't seem to affect domestic law, which is the real issue. While it is regrettable that we don't have control over immigration, at least the EU parliament cannot veto our internal laws.

That doesn't even make any sense. Obviously, you are subject to the laws which govern access to the single market.