By the time we got around to implementing it enough old people had died off that the vote would have gone the other way already.
The 18 year olds who vote less but vote for good parties are doing good, overall. The 60 year olds voting Tory their whole lives - not so much.
It's very easy to blame the young for all the problems earlier generations created and exacerbated. Not too wise though.
Eh, this is far from a given. Mao's Red Guards were passionate idiots. And America's young men are in thrall of Clavicular.
The most powerful empires in history have had large rebublics at their cores for good reason. The wisdom of a crowd greatly increases with its diversity.
The observed damage that the UK has inflicted to itself has been caused so far by all the parties that have been in power.
Voting in an educated manner?
Voting for candidates and policies that will help people overall, rather than those that will hurt people overall, just so that they can hurt Those People?
The UK just keeps kicking young people down. The boomers voting against our interests are whipping us into working to pay for their triple locked pensions.
The ballot paper arrived the day before the vote.
It was impossible to return it in time, and indeed, when I checked, my vote had arrived too late and was not counted.
The years where I want the freedom of movement the most will have passed by then.
[1]: Gilbert, Nomadic Peoples and Human Rights (2014), p. 73: "Freedom of movement within a country encompasses both the right to travel freely within the territory of the State and the right to relocate oneself and to choose one's place of residence".
On a related note; do you enjoy what America is right now? Because centralizing power and handing your country’s (American states are/were/should be essentially countries) sovereignty and self/determination to Brussels is how you get this, become the US of Europe, the next iteration in the centralized war machine of the psychopathic, narcissistic parasitic ruling class. When you lack diversity through separate, unique, district, and sovereign countries where people have oversight and control and can push back against horrible ideas and actions, you end up like us.
I’ve always found it unfortunate that the EU did not become a legitimate, constitutional form of the USA like it was before the Civil War that created this centralized authoritarian fake federal state that we know today. It would have been awe inspiring and really could have become the example for the rest of the world. Instead, the current version of the EU is strangling the whole continent.
The EU is right now talking about becoming a great military force to fight Russia. That’s the kind of movement you’re advocating for, my friend.
You think young people are kept down now, wait till they’re laying in some muddy battlefield as chopped meat or hiding from drone swarm or hypersonic missile attacks on their cities due to the belligerence of the EU aristocrats with no clothes.
The separate, unique sovereign countries are the ones with the horrible ideas and actions. See Victor Orban's Hungary. The whole point is to not let some goulash mussolini control European affairs.
> The EU is right now talking about becoming a great military force to fight Russia. That’s the kind of movement you’re advocating for, my friend.
Would you rather... not be able to fight Russia? It's not like the EU is the one with the invasion plans and threats, they're just preparing for the changing world order.
Obviously they can still travel to Europe, but they will need an ETIAS Visa Waiver in the future, instead of just going, they can't move for work and studying just as easy without applying for Visa/Permits and they don't have the same rights and access to services as Citizens of a country.
Uh, the fact that I cannot stay in Europe for more than 90 days in a 180 day period without a visa? As for all that other rubbish, every European city I’ve been to lives better than the people where I live in London. That’s proof enough for me that the EU is working.
Have you got an ancestor that was born in Canada? [1]
It sounds like that a child of a "red coat" born on the lands that would become Canada is sufficient... [2]
[1]: [Heads Up: Canadian Genealogy is about to get VERY popular!](https://old.reddit.com/r/Genealogy/comments/1qqkzte/heads_up...)
> On December 15, 2025 Canada enacted "Bill C-3", granting citizenship to people born before Dec. 15, 2025 with ANY level of Canadian ancestry they can document. (It used to be a "first generation limit")
[2]: https://old.reddit.com/r/Genealogy/comments/1qqkzte/heads_up...
> ancestors domiciled in the former colony of Newfoundland are still considered as Canadian born or naturalized for the purpose of citizenship by descent.
This is misleading.
Outside the first generation, the Canadian parent must have spent 3 years cumulatively in Canada prior to the birth, otherwise the child will not be a citizen. That's not a threshold you're likely to meet with a few holiday trips here and there.
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/ne...
Also young people always blame last gen for whatever, so expects -8 ~ 0 years old would vote for exit again…
FWIW I think Brexit was dumb but I never felt strongly about any of it because it doesn't effect me in any way. I'm not saying their views on Brexit specifically are likely to change.
You want to know why?
Because I've met more marginalized people. When I was 16, I didn't know anyone who was openly queer, and I lived in a moderately-affluent, nearly-all-white area of the US.
Now, I know many people who are queer, poor, disabled, and/or people of color, and because I was raised to care about people and believe to value every human life, I want them to be treated as well as I (a middle-class, white, straight, cis man) am.
The current millenial/GenZ generations are dealing with multiple economic crises during their career development, as well as property and other asset bubbles keeping them from accumulating the same assets as their parents.
Short/medium term though - and I think the voters should have understood this, you'll struggle a bit. But after about 15-20 years the UK will be fine. You just have to suffer a bit now. Look at the big picture.
In my view, you traded being one of the leading voices in what is increasingly shaping up to be one of the world's superpowers for being a somewhat isolated middle power, nostalgic for its former glory.
Why would that be worth it?
This led to loss in sovereignty and freedom. Sadly though it doesn't seem like the UK politicians are taking advantage of this (regulatory, laws, borders, immigrations etc) just yet, but at least now it's possible.
My point is: How can you become a superpower again if your foot is chained to a sluggish red tape monster like the EU? Even Norway recently learned that the EEA is not fully respected by the EU (ferroalloy imports).
I think you - and seemingly most others, are focusing on the short term downsides and negative economic impact.
But that would have happened regardless. Now it's up to the UK to try to increase productivity again, and only then Brexit will make sense. As mentioned, this will take 15 years at minimum.
You gave up the ability to dictate the rules. You'll still have to follow them.
The idea that we should have free trade and movement within Europe is not bad. Even unified regulation, etc.
Otherwise, we'll never have to scale to be competitive in the world.
The regulation could be better, less red tape. But that's always the case, everywhere.
But at the end of the day there isn't going to be an alternative to the EU in Europe. So it's better to remain in, and try to improve (yes, this is hard and slow).
The alternative is nothing, maybe a few remote trading partners, but physical proximity matters if you want industrial integration/growth.
I think you need to expand on this into some kind of actual, tangible result, this is just feelings. And even for feelings, it's nonsense - before Brexit my kids could legally move and work anywhere in the EU, how are they more free now?
All of that is theoretically possible. And a very admirable goal to have. The problem is modern Britain is no longer what it once was. From Strategy to execution it is increasingly rare to find a field where they lead, and more often then not talents that produces value are captured by the US.
The current climate, culture and geopolitical issues suggest it will take much longer than 15 years, likely a whole generation cycle roughly 30 years. And depending on how you count it we are at 6 - 10 years already.
And yet the biggest trading partner now dictates the standards, now without any UK input.
Like when people are against a president if the economy isn't doing well, regardless of if the alternative candidate would've been better.
This also isn't an issue thats being campaigned on. If there was another vote to join the EU, and people got flooded with anti-eu messaging specifically targeted at the demographic, I'd bet that number would drop.
And there are plenty of people on HN would say otherwise and say UK is fine.
Sortez les sortants...
Unfortunately the UK has a voting cohort that is both large and willing to screw over subsequent generations.
I personally was very pro-EU in my youth and deeply soured as I knew more and more to the point I'm staunchly against nowadays.
It started in 2005 with the referendum result being ignored. Then 2012 came with the shambolic management of the Greek crisis, something even the IMF points as ineffective. Then I was paid to put in place the Green Taxonomy and I saw how unready and dumb the whole thing was. Then there was the rejection of the Draghi report which made lose hope.
I find the mix of the euro being a deeply unfair currency union strongly advantaging Germany at the expense of the periphery, the fact that Germany keeps playing on it and amplifying the effect in direct violation of the treaty and yet always get a hall pass and their holier than though attitude despite being basically free loaders completely impossible to tolerate.
The 2019 CEP study showed it well. The union costs billions of GDP to France and Italy to give a minor advantage to the German. It's a dogmatic straight jacket managed by priests with zero actual economic understanding and serving the interests of a big mercantilist using development funds to shore up its tributaries in the east and still managing to gradually lose relevance as it can't even manage having a proper strategy despite the advantages, and a few fiscal parasites around it.
At 36, I deeply wish from my country to be free of the monster than the union has become and deeply ressent being a prisoner of a monetary union which intentionally didn't plan an exit path. And for what? Surrendering the ability to make law to the citizen of other countries who share neither my language, nor my culture, clearly don't have the same vision of the future than us and wants to force us into their ineffective model? No, thanks. No GDP gains or alleged diplomatic weight is worth this debasement.
I don't understand Brexiters because being out of the euros they had the best of both worlds but I respect their desire to be truly sovereign and free from the constant Germanic hegemonic push.
Edit:Lots of downvotes, very few counterarguments. I'm guessing facing the tensions at the heart of the project makes some of you frankly uncomfortable.
It's truly a crown in the gutter moment where you can be completely off-the-wall nuts (vide AfD) and, if you're just willing to campaign on anti-immigration, your ranks will instantly swell. Yet the establishment is somehow completely incapable or unwilling to capitalize/capture this.
There are billboards where offers of guaranteed rents are advertised etc.
vide https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/print-e...
from https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-t...
And I highly doubt other governments don't have similar calculations or aren't aware of them.
Like voting for AfD. I doubt many people look at this organization and its leaders to conclude that "ah, here is the talent I would love to have running my country." They're merely the only available option against. Same with brexit.
The foreigner-hate is so short-sighted. Your underpaid hospital worker, house cleaner, fruit picker, taxi driver, UberEats delivery is usually foreign, they don't mind working the exploitative conditions because for them the money is much better than home, providing you with affordable fruits, taxis and delivery (until the rent-seeking corporations want even more than 30%...). Get rid of them, and you'll have to pay living wages for your fruits and delivery. Heh, Westerners, still wanting to enjoy the fruits of colonization.
(Yeah the solution shouldn't be to continue allowing the exploitation, probably a better wealth distribution, but hey, why are you looking at my wallet, look at Elon's wallet!)
Crazy idea: educate more people, lower barriers to entry, hire people from poorer western countries and not Africa.
Poland has hospitals staffed 100% by Polish people. What prevents UK from doing the same?
Second, if immigration was only for skilled workers to plug shortages of certain skills, it would not be a problem.
It's a problem because in 2025 estimated 41 thousand unskilled people, mostly young men, landed in UK just via small boats.
Those are not doctors or nurses or engineers or even fruit pickers. They are unemployed and therefore a massive drain on British resources.
UK gov for some unexplained reason decided that they are responsible for housing and feeding them. The money comes from taxing UK citizens.
The housing is zero sum game so it also comes from depriving some UK citizens, driving up the prices.
And those people get sick too so they also take away hospital resources from UK citizens.
And they don't work so you now have mostly young males loitering in neighborhoods.
I do agree that there needs to be a honest conversation about what (economic) immigrants offer vs. what they cost, but it needs to be done properly.
We will need immigrants because we are below 2.1 in Total Fertility Rate. But, the EU doesn't need to be the comfy life raft of the world as it has been for the past 2-3 decades.
Do explain the miracle of Poland. What kind of economics work for Poland but couldn't possibly work for England.
Do explain how 41 thousand unskilled young man landing in UK shores via small boats are good for economy. Majority of them do no work, not even the low skill jobs. They cost UK citizens a lot of money because UK gov took upon themselves to pay for their housing and food.
The same stats are in every country that allowed massive immigration: the immigrants are a massive drain on resources of the country. And those resources are 100% come from taxing labor of citizens.
Currently UK pays for housing 100 thousand immigrants.
It's pretty obvious that if they stopped paying for housing them, they would save a lot of money.
Properly managed immigration could, in theory, be a net positive for countries.
But as it stands now if you combine immigration with well fare, you get a net drain.
Japans big catastrophe happened in 1990 with the bubble bursting, but that was years before the peak in working age population. Since then, the economy has not improved much but also has remained somehow stable.
The immigration we're talking about, the one of Africans etc. immigrants flooding west, is destructive to the economies based on pretty much every statistic I've seen.
Those immigrants are on welfare in disproportional numbers compared to native population.
E.g. in US 72% Somalis are on welfare and the same stats are in West Europe.
They cost the state gigantic amount of money.
And per-capita crime stats are so bad that governments are hiding them from public.
This is all documented by government's own statistics and reasonably well reported.
Immigration COULD be a net positive to the economy IF it was managed properly but it isn't and it isn't.
Tourism isn't immigration and I don't see what trade has to do with it.
This is bullshit. Donald Trump isn't a credible source on statistics about immigration. The highest percentage I can find for food stamps is 54% and a high percentage of food stamps recipients are employed.
https://cis.org/Report/Somali-Immigrants-Minnesota?utm_sourc...
Asylum seekers in the US are a net positive source of revenue. They also create jobs and drive economic growth.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/28fe4e756...
Almost every country in the west is tightening it's system. In the UK claiming ILR will take a significantly longer period of lawful residence, and a shorter time will require you to meet a high income threshold. It is nearly impossible to get PR in Canada now unless you are fluent in both English and French and have a PhD or several years of canadian work experience. The bar has also gone up in Australia too.
The reason why this doesn't seem to move the needle on the anti-immigration vote is because the folks on that side can always just move the goalposts and be the "true" anti-immigrant party. I believe these days Reform UK wants cancel all ILRs and start actively deporting long term residents who don't meet an ever raising bar. Its madness.
the American and German far-right by contrast seem to be the polar opposite of data-driven. No the lazy 'IQ by country' maps don't count.
It's so bad that I'm certain if you could show Brits of 1940 the state of London today they would enthusiastically join forces with their German brothers to prevent this fate. It's a catastrophe. The complete genocide of indigenous Brits within Great Britain is now a foreseeable possibility within a century or two.
denuoweb•3h ago
saubeidl•2h ago
tonyedgecombe•2h ago