This is a great post but I would say that there were some people who were absolutely dedicated to achieving Brexit and in large part their participation can be explained by the proposed financial transaction tax.
The idea that a supra-national entity might be able to impose a tax that could be difficult to mitigate was absolutely intolerable to various millionaires and billionaires e.g. The Telegraph owning Barclay Brothers. Any downsides from the resulting chaos, which in any case would only affect the working and lower middle classes, would be more than offset by the ability to bank offshore and retain their profits untaxed.
You’re absolutely correct and if there’s one thing I wish I included it would’ve been a ‘charitable’ description of the possibilities of Brexit. The reason why it wasn’t included is that I think the actual motivations of the arch-Brexiteers within parliament and the media aren’t a contributing factor to why Brexit happened. They certainly had a vision for a potential Brexit but I don’t think that played any role in the decision to hold a referendum, and I believe only a very small subset of the 52% voted Leave did so because they shared the ‘Singapore with worse weather’ vision of the Brexit elite.
Yes, I agree. I just wanted to point out that Brexit wouldn’t have happened without some fairly serious money being put behind it (UKIP’s funding had to come from somewhere and there were not one but two pro-Brexit campaigns Vote Leave and LeaveEU) and that money had to spent with a purpose.
This is a great post but I would say that there were some people who were absolutely dedicated to achieving Brexit and in large part their participation can be explained by the proposed financial transaction tax.
The idea that a supra-national entity might be able to impose a tax that could be difficult to mitigate was absolutely intolerable to various millionaires and billionaires e.g. The Telegraph owning Barclay Brothers. Any downsides from the resulting chaos, which in any case would only affect the working and lower middle classes, would be more than offset by the ability to bank offshore and retain their profits untaxed.
You’re absolutely correct and if there’s one thing I wish I included it would’ve been a ‘charitable’ description of the possibilities of Brexit. The reason why it wasn’t included is that I think the actual motivations of the arch-Brexiteers within parliament and the media aren’t a contributing factor to why Brexit happened. They certainly had a vision for a potential Brexit but I don’t think that played any role in the decision to hold a referendum, and I believe only a very small subset of the 52% voted Leave did so because they shared the ‘Singapore with worse weather’ vision of the Brexit elite.
Yes, I agree. I just wanted to point out that Brexit wouldn’t have happened without some fairly serious money being put behind it (UKIP’s funding had to come from somewhere and there were not one but two pro-Brexit campaigns Vote Leave and LeaveEU) and that money had to spent with a purpose.