Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Exactly. The EU has never let rules get in the way of realpolitik when a situation is sufficiently important and it won't with this one.

My impression is that British PM Cameron intended to silence the "leave the EU" contingent in British politics once and for all with his, partly successful campaign to get some concessions from the EU and a follow on referendum on continued membership. The unexpected result has changed the situation in ways that few expected or forecasted. That said it is a democratically determined outcome and cannot be ignored. Moreover the issues involved here in Britain also exist, perhaps less intensely, in other EU nations including France and Italy, among others.

The natural motivation for the EU now will be to punish the UK for its rejection by strict interpretation of the treaty requirements - so as to set an example for other potential exiters. Likewise the natural motivation for the UK will be to maintain as many trade and economic connections as possible with continental Europe - for example something like the provisions enjoyed by Norway - a non EU member which enjoys close, mutually beneficial economic ties to the union, without the bother of all the other intrusive rules.

The long term interests of both parties are a bit different from the short term ones. Europe and the world are now beset by a number of new and emerging threats to peace and stability: the maintanance of some degree of European unity is as important now as it was in the late 1940s when it all started. Disunity would serve no one's long term interests.

The EU has until now successfully evaded facing fundamental issues of soverignty in its expansion across the continent of Europe since the collapse of the Soviet empire (referenda with uncertain, and on occasion unexpected, outcomes were replaced by more comfortable and predictable - by the bureaucrats involved - administrative treaties and agreements). Meanwhile a largely bureaucratic EU state with little democratic accountability has grown with ever expanding reach into the daily lives and economic activity of the people of Europe. This is the foundation for the domestic political ussue in the UK and it would likely be a grave mistake to assume that this Europe wide issue has been fully resolved with the BREXIT.

Germany has the largest economy in the EU and, with its export economy, is the chief beneficiary of a common EURO currency which ties its principal export markets to the exporter's currency, thereby limiting the monetary adjustments that would otherwise encourage domestic proiduction in those markets. Together with France, Germany has been the preeminent leader and spokesmam for EU solidarity and policy. Chancellor Merkel has in recent years become the principal spokesman for that duopoly, but her domestic political status appears to have been damaged by reactions to her immigration policy - an issue that resonates in the UK and across Europe. How domestic politics in Germany may resonate with the ongoing consequences of the BREXIT wil be interesting to see. Similar emergingg domestic issues in France, Italy, Spain and even ever-dependent and angry Greece may arise as well.

In short there is great potential for more unanticipated outcomes ahead.

Well-founded perspective.
Same govt - Same financiers - No change.

I sense 'triple-jeopardy' though.
Severed head (Meta) of beast.....
Cameron - Is delaying A-50 'intentionally' - Discord-evolves...?
Is 'discord' the 'primary' agenda - To topple the EU?

This is going to be fun to watch, because any so-called punishment against the UK is a two edged sword. Less competition means higher prices for both.

I agree with you. Still, it's a tough dilemma for both parties.

This whole bollux-facade is based on what the EU has to offer Britain.
The EU is dependant on The UK, not vice-versa.
Why do you think they're so pissed-off?

And it's all orchestrated!
Go to trough, and drink.

I bought wasabi beans (50 gms) today for 10 pence (Were 99p)
Rule Britania!!!

It seems you have no understanding of Econ 101.

I don't see it as a punishment (but it certainly looks so).

It's the 'normal' procedure ('normal' is stupid since no country really cancelled the membership before) that they follow the legal procedure, both sides.

If the UK gets some special treatment, it could look for 27 others as if it was the result of a coercion - why shouldn't they do the same?
And countries like Norway and Switzerland could ask why they are treated different.

True.
No idea what it means.
I guess at 'economics' for beginners'?
UK doesn't do the '101' shite.

I look at a cloud and say 'look, there's a cloud - Might rain later'.

Do you know what "comparative advantage" means?

I'm just reminded that in Germany a lot is about sausages.

It might well be that the UK is playing the beleidigte Leberwurst ("offended liver pâté") because don't didn’t get an Extrawurst (‘extra sausage’), which means that they expected special treatment (an extra sausage is a treat) but didn’t get it.

All countries with international trade understand it. Even the UK.
Q: Does the UK have Chinese products?

No idea - We will soon though.
Cheap materials promote manufacturing.
Sorry the US won't be having ALL the pie in future, but....que sera.

This will give you some idea of UK's trading partners. They trade with all these countries, because IT BENEFITS THEM.
http://www.worldstopexports.com/united-kingdoms-top-import-partners/

Don't feel sorry for us in the US. We represent only five percent of the world population, but produce the most (GDP) in products and services. In simple terms that even you can understand, we are the richest country in the world.

China will overtake us in GDP, but they have 1/5th of the world population. It only means not all Chinese will enjoy a minimal standard of living.

We in California enjoy the 13th richest if we were a country.

EVER VIEWED ONE OF MY LINKS, Cic?

Gesture RECIPROCATED.

I quite agree with all you wrote. The dilemma is that those short term issues are, in my view, very contrary to the long term interests of all involved. European unity remains a vailid principle and is in everyone's interests. However the interests of the bureaucrats who run the EU are a bit different - theirs are the preservations of their current powers and position - not the same thing. The UK is not the same as Norway or Switzerland, but both of these nations have better deals with the EU than it appears the EU may be offering the UK.

Norway's financial contribution to the EU

The Swiss government has split the sum, year related and purpose related. According to the newspaper "Handelszeitung", Switzerland paid 460 million Euros in 2012.

Has anybody offered any deal yet? My understanding is that they have two years to hammer out a deal. The UK is not Norway and it isn't Switzerland, it's the country with the fifth largest economy in the world. Of course, diplomats and negotiators are not going to outright say, "We're giving you a special deal because you are a top world economic power in and of yourself and most of our members are not". They'll call it something else, they'll swear on a stack of Bibles that economic size is NOT the reason they are giving the UK the special deal. But the EU will very likely offer the UK something to minimize the difference between the UK not being, strictly speaking, part of the EU and being actually part of the EU. It's in the EU's interest to do so.

SPOT-ON.

Damn, there are some frikkin tuned-in folk, here, afterall.

No. Trade is about comparative advantage. It's where one country can produce something more efficiently than the other country that can be used for trade. It has to do with quality and price; scarcity, price and demand.