Why The Hate For Brexit Voters?

[ChristineM]

But if you cut off their opportunities by limiting their ability to find work in other countries and then Brits will work for less, all else being equal.

Things are not equal though, very few brits will do farm work for minimum wage

 

[ChristineM]

Mum's ex step dad, millionaire landowning farmer.

Yes i know im a bit late on this one. But do you happen to know how much of that wealth came from EU subsidies

 

[Augustus]

You might want to inform yourself on the practices by the likes of Cambridge Analytica.
Then you might want to look up which sides in politics are employing such tactics.

Yes, well done. It’s hardly ground breaking info.

You might want to inform yourself on elementary communication theory and PR practice that have been developing since WW2 and especially in the online era so you can better put this in context.

Cambridge Analytica was not some ground breaking, super manipulator, it was just using fairly standard techniques but beyond the ethical boundaries. Not particularly unique, just pushing the boundaries more than most.

It’s fair enough to criticise those who used such companies, but using social media data to target ads is what makes social media valuable. Acquiring data through opaque practices is also standard, but companies who exceed legal limits should be punished.

As they say though, if you aren’t paying for your account, then you are the product. Folk give this data willingly to Facebook and friends.

All major campaigns rely on social media data and questionable practices. Most stay just within the bounds of legality, but they still command if the same things.

But people read one article about how some company uses “psychological warfare” methods and they get very excitable and don’t really bother to think about the broader field of professional communication and what practices happen across the board.

Brexit was the paradigm case of folk who think they are “high information” voters who simply read a broadsheet that article that chimes with their preferences and swallow everything it says whole.

This is the kind of thing that fools people in campaign, being presented with information that is not wrong, but is absorbed without a broader context that would change the way it is interpreted.

What do you think CA did for Leave that was fundamentally different to what the Remain campaign did?

 

[Debater Slayer]

But eastern Europeans would do it and did do it. Getting kicked out of the country left crops unharvested because the job/wage was beneath most brits.

This is one of my central problems with liberalism and one of the main reasons I refuse to identify with it. The implication when companies hire immigrants because Brits won't accept measly wages is that it's okay to overwork or underpay the immigrants instead of raising the wages to a reasonable standard and listening more to the concerns of working-class citizens, even if listening to them entails a compromise where neither party fully gets what they want.

I'm not saying that low-skilled immigrant labor or globalism should be eliminated, but many liberals seem to treat both as sacred tenets that should rarely be questioned or touched. I think that the flaws of liberal democracy and its lack of universal applicability—contrary to what many liberals believe about it—are more urgent than ever and cannot just be brushed aside as the protestations of racists or ignoramuses.

 

[Rival]

Yes i know im a bit late on this one. But do you happen to know how much of that wealth came from EU subsidies

No clue.

 

[ChristineM]

This is one of my central problems with liberalism and one of the main reasons I refuse to identify with it. The implication when companies hire immigrants because Brits won't accept measly wages is that it's okay to overwork or underpay the immigrants instead of raising the wages to a reasonable standard and listening more to the concerns of working-class citizens, even if listening to them entails a compromise where neither party fully gets what they want.

I'm not saying that low-skilled immigrant labor or globalism should be eliminated, but many liberals seem to treat both as sacred tenets that should rarely be questioned or touched. I think that the flaws of liberal democracy and its lack of universal applicability—contrary to what many liberals believe about it—are more urgent than ever and cannot just be brushed aside as the protestations of racists or ignoramuses.

Not measly but minimum wage. Yes ok thats measly but thats whats the government deems

Raising the wage will mean raising prices at the farm gate which wholesalers, retailers and the public will not accept.

 

[Stevicus]

Not measly but minimum wage. Yes ok thats measly but thats whats the government deems

Raising the wage will mean raising prices at the farm gate which wholesalers, retailers and the public will not accept.

The public might be more ready to accept it if their wages go up, too - or if there are reductions in prices in other areas, such as in costs for housing, energy, or healthcare. People typically spend more on housing and transportation than on food (or even taxes).

 

[Rival]

The public might be more ready to accept it if their wages go up, too - or if there are reductions in prices in other areas, such as in costs for housing, energy, or healthcare. People typically spend more on housing and transportation than on food (or even taxes).

The EU dealt with the Great Recession extremely badly and almost all of this is a fallout of that. The austerity, the wage slump, the immigration crisis etc.

 

[ChristineM]

The austerity, the wage slump, the immigration crisis etc.

Acted on by individual countries who set their own rules.

In November 2008, the European Commission presented the European Economic Recovery Plan,[138][139] a plan of 200 billion euros (1.2% of GDP) to fight against the consequences of the economic crisis in the European Union.[140] In reality, the plan is a series of national measures to be implemented by each government, without much coherency between the policies. The measures included incentives to investment, tax cuts and social measures.​

​

Great Recession in Europe - Wikipedia

 

[ChristineM]

The public might be more ready to accept it if their wages go up, too - or if there are reductions in prices in other areas, such as in costs for housing, energy, or healthcare. People typically spend more on housing and transportation than on food (or even taxes).

That's the thing, the money is not there to increase wages.

 

[Rival]

Acted on by individual countries who set their own rules.

In November 2008, the European Commission presented the European Economic Recovery Plan,[138][139] a plan of 200 billion euros (1.2% of GDP) to fight against the consequences of the economic crisis in the European Union.[140] In reality, the plan is a series of national measures to be implemented by each government, without much coherency between the policies. The measures included incentives to investment, tax cuts and social measures.​

​

Great Recession in Europe - Wikipedia

Yes, but given these countries are in a union, often using the same currencies, all of these policies had knock on effects. That's the point of being in a union; all decisions are jointly made. It evidently didn't work, especially not for Greece, or for Eastern Europe which had just begun to recover and then was hugely hit again, leading to huge amounts of immigration.

 

[Rival]

That's the thing, the money is not there to increase wages.

It is, it's just all in London. We're the most centralised country in Europe and all the wealth goes to and tends to stay in London. We are incredibly rich on paper, that money exists no problem, but Westminster won't let it go anywhere else.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Not measly but minimum wage. Yes ok thats measly but thats whats the government deems

Raising the wage will mean raising prices at the farm gate which wholesalers, retailers and the public will not accept.

I have no doubt that it is a complicated issue with no easy solutions, but my point is that concerns about it that may have led someone to vote for Brexit don't have to be based on racism or ignorance. I can't blame a low-wage worker for wanting better pay from a job that globalism, through the underpayment of foreign workers, has made far cheaper than it would have otherwise been.

I think that what you've said brings up another major flaw of liberalism, though: When an exploitative or unfair status quo makes life easier for a subset of people at the expense of another subset, that status quo becomes entrenched and regarded by the former as synonymous with their own interests. Why is it fair for them to vote for the continuation thereof but unfair for many among the affected subset to vote for a policy or candidate they believe will bring about change that will improve their situation?

 

[Stevicus]

The EU dealt with the Great Recession extremely badly and almost all of this is a fallout of that. The austerity, the wage slump, the immigration crisis etc.

It seems that there are consequences from integrating previously separate economies which previously had vast disparities in the standard of living. The merging of East and West Germany did pose some complications, just as an example (and they had the same language and culture). With the EU, some nations and economies were much bigger than others, so once the barriers were removed, the natural tendency would be to push for equilibrium. This invariably means that some money will be leaving the larger economies and shifting over to the smaller economies.

In practice, the wealthy who still live in the larger, more powerful economies will still want to remain wealthy, so they'll take from the less wealthy in their own countries to give it to the even lesser wealthy in other countries. It's a variation of the "trickle down" theory.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, but given these countries are in a union, often using the same currencies, all of these policies had knock on effects. That's the point of being in a union; all decisions are jointly made. It evidently didn't work, especially not for Greece, or for Eastern Europe which had just begun to recover and then was hugely hit again, leading to huge amounts of immigration.

Ok Wikipedia is wrong when it says In reality, the plan is a series of national measures to be implemented by each government, without much coherency between the policies.

fair enough

 

[ChristineM]

It is, it's just all in London. We're the most centralised country in Europe and all the wealth goes to and tends to stay in London. We are incredibly rich on paper, that money exists no problem, but Westminster won't let it go anywhere else.

And how is that anything to do with Brexit?

 

[Rival]

It seems that there are consequences from integrating previously separate economies which previously had vast disparities in the standard of living. The merging of East and West Germany did pose some complications, just as an example (and they had the same language and culture). With the EU, some nations and economies were much bigger than others, so once the barriers were removed, the natural tendency would be to push for equilibrium. This invariably means that some money will be leaving the larger economies and shifting over to the smaller economies.

In practice, the wealthy who still live in the larger, more powerful economies will still want to remain wealthy, so they'll take from the less wealthy in their own countries to give it to the even lesser wealthy in other countries. It's a variation of the "trickle down" theory.

This is why a lot of people consider it a quasi-socialist project aiming at a federal union.

I'm not sure about the quasi-socialism but it definitely has some federliasing tendencies.

There are some countries which shouldn't have been allowed to join for not meeting the criteria but were allowed in anyway, such as Greece and later on I imagine Ukraine. Allowing these atrocious economies to join was a huge mistake, as was later admitted. You are spot on that there is a disequilibrium in the EU, since countries like Bulgaria are simply not in the same league as say, France, which makes it difficult for those in the wealthier nations not to feel some resentment at their wealth being taken from them, which is how the poor experience it. And if it's not that, it migrants working for a pittance in the wealthier nations, dragging wages down for the poorer classes as a whole.

 

[Rival]

Ok Wikipedia is wrong when it says In reality, the plan is a series of national measures to be implemented by each government, without much coherency between the policies.

fair enough

Yes it's totally wrong because you don't understand it.

The EU is a union of integrated economies. When one economy does something the rest feel the burn or benefit, that's literally the point.

 

[Rival]

And how is that anything to do with Brexit?

I can see why you didn't vote for Brexit.

A lot of it was a protest vote against Westminster for caring about everywhere else except the most deprived, especially in the North East, where I came from and where there were fewer EU subsidies, so it felt like literally no-one was helping us.

 

[ChristineM]

I can't blame a low-wage worker for wanting better pay from a job that globalism, through the underpayment of foreign workers, has made far cheaper than it would have otherwise been.

Minimum wage is set by the government. Agreed, minimum wage is lousy but foreign workers were willing to travel to a new country to work for that amount. Brexit ended that and British workers will not replace the expelled workers for the same money. Hence food rots in the fields, farmers go bankrupt.