[hacker_9]

It does, because it means once the conservatives agree on something they have more sway to vote it in. And at this point in time I am tired of listening to Westminster fighting with itself, and making us as a whole look like a joke to the rest of the EU.

[kogepathic]

> and making us as a whole look like a joke to the rest of the EU.

Have you read the leaked details of the meeting between May and Juncker? [0] [1]

A lot of people on the continent already think May is a joke. What good does taking a "tough" stance do in negotiating with the EU? Sure, it looks good for the local electorate (especially as she's just called an election), but negotiations aren't about being "tough" they're about getting a good outcome for UK/EU citizens living in the respective countries (and a trade deal, if they ever get around to that).

Comments like "bloody difficult" [2] also don't help things. To those of us on the continent, it seems that the UK has decided to go with the "bull in a china shop" strategy with May.

The amount of animosity toward the EU coming from the UK is just stunning. We get it, you dislike the EU, hence why you voted to leave. But it seems like the UK government is intent to burn every last bridge with the EU through their rhetoric...

[0] https://twitter.com/jeremycliffe/status/858810953353367552?l...

[1] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/theresa-may-j...

[2] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-39784170

[hacker_9]

Admittedly I was unsure about Brexit to begin with, but ever since we said we are going to leave, the EU has been up in arms telling us we will be punished, and we have to pay €100 billion to even be allowed. Despite us being in the top 3 biggest contributors to the EU budget to begin with. I can firmly say since that this is not a group I want to be associated with.

[kogepathic]

> Despite us being in the biggest top 3 contributors to the EU budget

I've heard this argument given a lot in discussions about Brexit.

I don't agree with it, and here's why:

Yes, the UK is a top contributor to the EU budget. But view the EU as a marriage. When the UK joined, they agreed to pay their share of the living expenses (so to say).

When a human couple get a divorce, you don't get to go back and say "well I paid more than half of the living expenses, therefore they owe me X for all the excess contributions I made while we were married."

Nope, sorry. That's not how marriage works, and you can't go and say "well now that we're on worse terms, actually you owe me all that money back"

So, on to your next point:

> the EU has been up in arms telling us we will be punished, and we have to pay €100 billion to even be allowed.

Yeah, because the UK has made commitments before Brexit to fund EU programs. This is like a married couple buying a house together. When you split up, you either sell the house and split the proceeds, or someone buys the other one out. Since the EU isn't for sale, this is the UK buying out their portion of the commitment.

I just read today that the EMA faces $400 million in rent till 2039 on a London building they will be moving out of. [0]

So, please make up your mind. Either the UK has no responsibility to pay for its previous agreements, or the EU should also be allowed to break their previous agreements with the UK.

You can't eat your cake and have it too.

[0] http://www.politico.eu/article/report-ema-faces-e400m-decade...

[lostlogin]

Thanks for this - it's a good summary if the EU/UK positions.