Brexit - real world implications

[jjlynn27]

If I undersood your question, Uk ones will be paid by UK, EU ones by EU (obviously partly by UK while we are still there)?

[Russwhitehouse]

I can't believe you are all getting bogged down in all this facts and figures rubbish! We've "taken back control" and will all be lovely and independent. No more Brussels telling us what to do, two world wars and a world cup, who are they to dictate to us etc etc, trading with the rest of the world blah blah blah. This time next year Rodney...........

[Benbay001]

Russwhitehouse said:

I can't believe you are all getting bogged down in all this facts and figures rubbish! We've "taken back control" and will all be lovely and independent. No more Brussels telling us what to do, two world wars and a world cup, who are they to dictate to us etc etc, trading with the rest of the world blah blah blah. This time next year Rodney...........

Do you live in France?

[anonymous-user]

Derek Smith said:

sidicks said:

That remains to be seen. As you well know, there are more demands for public money than there is money available, so priority calls have to be made.

What is clearly misleading is to pretend that we've genuinely lost this £3bn from the EU - we still have that money, it was actually ours in the first place, but the government MAY decide to spend it differently.

It is, though, likely to be a loss to research, isn't it. As I pointed out, the government's priorities are for what gains them votes in the main. There was something about this in the New Scientist editorial, I think last week. As I read it I realised that the author had his fingers crossed.

It's gone.

No Derek, the UK government understands the importance of science and technology research and development, which is why the UK is currently the centre for research within the EU. That didn't happen by chance.

Being outside the EU doesn't change our focus on sciences or technology, its one of the key areas that will drive the modern UK economy. It doesn't take a genius to understand this.

One scenario that negative people like you just can't allow themselves to think, is that this change in our relationship with the world may just be the driver for huge investment in what we are world class at, such as science and technology research and development.

We let ourselves down post war by not investing in our inventiveness, we led the world in science, but didn't back that up with investment in the end product that brought the money back in. We have learned our lesson from that period and the far more likely scenario now is for this sector of our economy to boom.

[jjlynn27]

jsf said:

No Derek, the UK government understands the importance of science and technology research and development, which is why the UK is currently the centre for research within the EU. That didn't happen by chance.

Being outside the EU doesn't change our focus on sciences or technology, its one of the key areas that will drive the modern UK economy. It doesn't take a genius to understand this.

One scenario that negative people like you just can't allow themselves to think, is that this change in our relationship with the world may just be the driver for huge investment in what we are world class at, such as science and technology research and development.

We let ourselves down post war by not investing in our inventiveness, we led the world in science, but didn't back that up with investment in the end product that brought the money back in. We have learned our lesson from that period and the far more likely scenario now is for this sector of our economy to boom.

So, those scientists saying how affected they are, how ridiculous the whole thing is, they are just mistaken? Can't see the big picture?
Hmm, opinion of 13 Nobel laureates (amongst many others) vs opinion of jsf. You know, Gurdon, Nurse, Higgs what do they know.

[anonymous-user]

jjlynn27 said:

So, those scientists saying how affected they are, how ridiculous the whole thing is, they are just mistaken? Can't see the big picture?
Hmm, opinion of 13 Nobel laureates (amongst many others) vs opinion of jsf. You know, Gurdon, Nurse, Higgs what do they know.

With respect, they don't know what the future holds. Their comfort bubble has just been burst so its understandable they are nervous.

Despite what you or they think right now, the die has been cast, things are changing so they are going to have to deal with that. Crying about this change wont alter the facts of the now, which is that we have voted to leave the EU and we are leaving the EU. That obviously has its challenges after 43 years of going through the motions of one particular system, but it also brings new opportunities that could well be the beginning of greater things via a different system.

The most likely outcome for the science and tech sector in this country is continued investment. We already had a government commitment just prior to the referendum to increase science investment to a level higher than has ever been the case in the UK, that commitment is for the next 5 years. What will happen now is the way the research funding is structured will change, its an area that will receive a high priority.

[rs1952]

jjlynn27 said:

So, those scientists saying how affected they are, how ridiculous the whole thing is, they are just mistaken? Can't see the big picture?
Hmm, opinion of 13 Nobel laureates (amongst many others) vs opinion of jsf. You know, Gurdon, Nurse, Higgs what do they know.

And there are many other examples of course.

One drawback of parliamentary democracy is that MPs like to be re-elected come election time, and many actions that they take have that objective alone in mind.

That's why I found it almost amusing that two areas at least who voted strongly to leave, the North East and Wales, have now begun to bleat about HMG replacing the funding they currently get from the EU regional aid budget.

But there are no tory seats at stake in either the North East or South Wales, so where is the political motivation for finding this funding?

Under EU Regional aid arrangements this money came from the EU irrespective of the inclinations of the national government. Perhaps a very major advantage if the present UK government, of whatever colour, can't find any incentive for providing the funds themselves.

There may be Brexit tears amongst the Brexiteers in those areas before too long

[jjlynn27]

jsf said:

jjlynn27 said:

So, those scientists saying how affected they are, how ridiculous the whole thing is, they are just mistaken? Can't see the big picture?
Hmm, opinion of 13 Nobel laureates (amongst many others) vs opinion of jsf. You know, Gurdon, Nurse, Higgs what do they know.

With respect, they don't know what the future holds. Their comfort bubble has just been burst so its understandable they are nervous.

Despite what you or they think right now, the die has been cast, things are changing so they are going to have to deal with that. Crying about this change wont alter the facts of the now, which is that we have voted to leave the EU and we are leaving the EU. That obviously has its challenges after 43 years of going through the motions of one particular system, but it also brings new opportunities that could well be the beginning of greater things via a different system.

The most likely outcome for the science and tech sector in this country is continued investment. We already had a government commitment just prior to the referendum to increase science investment to a level higher than has ever been the case in the UK, that commitment is for the next 5 years. What will happen now is the way the research funding is structured will change, its an area that will receive a high priority.

LOL. Comfort bubble.

You have no idea what govt. is going to invest in. You are just making that up. Even if they match all investment, how are they going to fix collaborations and UK scientists not being invite to participate in international research? Going to write a letter demanding inclusion of UK scientists?

Once you drop the usual bs of 'greater things' (what was stopping them now?), your post is empty of any substance.

[sidicks]

jjlynn27 said:

LOL. Comfort bubble.

You have no idea what govt. is going to invest in.

Nor do you.

The default assumption must be that funding will continue as currently (in the absence of information to the contrary).

jjlynn27 said:

You are just making that up. Even if they match all investment, how are they going to fix collaborations and UK scientists not being invite to participate in international research? Going to write a letter demanding inclusion of UK scientists?

Once you drop the usual bs of 'greater things' (what was stopping them now?), your post is empty of any substance.

Pot, kettle etc.

[anonymous-user]

The world has just changed, people are going to have to deal with that.

[jjlynn27]

sidicks said:

jjlynn27 said:

LOL. Comfort bubble.

You have no idea what govt. is going to invest in.

Nor do you.

I didn't claim that I know what the govt is going to invest in. He did. Try to keep up please.

sidicks said:

The default assumption must be that funding will continue as currently (in the absence of information to the contrary).

people who know what they are talking about said:

....
assertions that the Treasury will make up this shortfall are naive and complacent, given that successive governments have allowed Britain to languish well below the OEDC and EU averages in its research investment as a proportion of GDP.

And that doesn't, once again, take into account collaborative work and impact of limits on free movement of labour;

people who know what they are talking about said:

Science thrives on permeability of ideas and people, and flourishes in environments that pool intelligence, minimise barriers, and are open to free exchange and collaboration.

[chris watton]

jjlynn27 said:

Something....

You know, perhaps if you'd spent a little less time on these forums pretending to be better than others, then maybe you wouldn't have to be so worried about your job as 'EU promoter of Green Energy', (whatever the fk that means). Or perhaps try looking at something else that doesn't rely so much on EU subsidies for your livelihood?

Just a thought...

[ATG]

jsf said:

The world has just changed, people are going to have to deal with that.

We know this. I'm struggling not to add "you 'tard" to the end of that sentence. Oops. Seriously. You offer vapid platitudes and then say "lump it" in respobse to people saying there are some serious risks ahead. Why not just say "Yes, the are some serious risks." From the outset, as that's the position you finally seem to have adopted.

[sidicks]

jjlynn27 said:

people who know what they are talking about said:

....
assertions that the Treasury will make up this shortfall are naive and complacent, given that successive governments have allowed Britain to languish well below the OEDC and EU averages in its research investment as a proportion of GDP.

And that doesn't, once again, take into account collaborative work and impact of limits on free movement of labour;

Those 'people who know what they are talking about are simply trying to talk up their own book, understandable as that is. Regardless, the fact that EU previously provided funding meant the UK didn't have to. Now that situation is likely to change and that money is still available to do just that.

jjlynn27 said:

people who know what they are talking about said:

Science thrives on permeability of ideas and people, and flourishes in environments that pool intelligence, minimise barriers, and are open to free exchange and collaboration.

I wasn't aware that the only other scientists in the world were in the EU - thanks for that new information...

[jjlynn27]

chris watton said:

jjlynn27 said:

Something....

You know, perhaps if you'd spent a little less time on these forums pretending to be better than others, then maybe you wouldn't have to be so worried about your job as 'EU promoter of Green Energy', (whatever the fk that means). Or perhaps try looking at something else that doesn't rely so much on EU subsidies for your livelihood?

Just a thought...

Ok, calm down. I'm not sure that I'm 'pretending to be better than others' (what a weird conclusion). My 'previous job' was, I think, 'union representative for council workers'. It's to see if the people are really that thick to judge based on what someone puts as their 'occupation'. But thanks for your concern. It's appreciated. (even if it doesn't look like it)

[ATG]

chris watton said:

You know, perhaps if you'd spent a little less time on these forums pretending to be better than others, then maybe you wouldn't have to be so worried about your job as 'EU promoter of Green Energy', (whatever the fk that means). Or perhaps try looking at something else that doesn't rely so much on EU subsidies for your livelihood?

Just a thought...

He's not pretending to be better than others. He's just repeatedly pointing out when people are posting nonsense. If they don't like that, well? There are a few posters on here who have expressed logical reasons for voting for brexit. I happen to think they've misjudged things, but at least what they've said isn't first order daft. However there is a great deal of first order daft stuff said, and if people don't like having their attention drawn to that, maybe they should think a bit harder before reaching for the keyboard.

[powerstroke]

sidicks said:

jjlynn27 said:

people who know what they are talking about said:

....
assertions that the Treasury will make up this shortfall are naive and complacent, given that successive governments have allowed Britain to languish well below the OEDC and EU averages in its research investment as a proportion of GDP.

And that doesn't, once again, take into account collaborative work and impact of limits on free movement of labour;

Those 'people who know what they are talking about are simply trying to talk up their own book, understandable as that is. Regardless, the fact that EU previously provided funding meant the UK didn't have to. Now that situation is likely to change and that money is still available to do just that.

jjlynn27 said:

people who know what they are talking about said:

Science thrives on permeability of ideas and people, and flourishes in environments that pool intelligence, minimise barriers, and are open to free exchange and collaboration.

I wasn't aware that the only other scientists in the world were in the EU - thanks for that new information...

Factoid , most remaininians are also life members of the flat Earth society...

[sidicks]

powerstroke said:

Factoid , most remaininians are also life members of the flat Earth society...

Not sure that's helpful (or accurate).

[jjlynn27]

sidicks said:

I wasn't aware that the only other scientists in the world were in the EU - thanks for that new information...

It seems that neither are those 13 Nobel laureates. I think you and jsf should write them a later. To put their tiny minds at rest and explain to them that world is their oyster. Jsf can tell them what is govt going to do, you can tell them about possibilities to actually work with other scientists, now that the shackles of the mean EU are finally gone.

As for the money, I was under impression that that money is earmarked for NHS? I think there was a bus or something, could be wrong.

[sidicks]

jjlynn27 said:

As for the money, I was under impression that that money is earmarked for NHS? I think there was a bus or something, could be wrong.

Still persisting with that old chestnut?