Brexit - Should they stay or should they go?

Constitutionally, she can not say. So she doesn't.

Wait, the Queen does't have the freedom of speech!?

On matters of politics, no.

Yes, but so do people who sign non-disclosure agreements. If she really needs to express an opinion, she can abdicate. If she wants to be Queen, she is required to shut up and wave.

I love these throw away lines. Yes if she wants to express an opinion she should give up her entire way of life and everything she has ever known. Meanwhile back in reality ...

That IS the reality. No ifs, no buts.She can express her political opinions once she is no longer the monarch, otherwise she keeps schtum.

It's part of the nature of being a constitutional monarch that there are rules you have to obey to remain monarch.And going from queen back to princess (like she used to be) is hardly the abandonment of all she has ever known.

She wouldn't be giving up anything. King Charles is hardly likely to throw his own mother out in the street. He's unpopular enough already.The reason she doesn't express an opinion is because it's her duty not to take sides. The royals are big on duty.

It is mostly native British people thinking that poorer immigrants are making them poorer. Such as the Polish immigrants.But academic studies show that the solidly "rich" South Korean nation of 44 million people would actually see a rise in incomes (especially by 2050 if unification happened soon) if the ultra-poor North Korean population of 24 million unified with the south.North Korea is about the most poor nation in the world if you convert their incomes to U.S. currency.Similarly, the Brits will gain (IMO) from the Polish gains in income (which Brits feel is on their backs), which are happening rapidly. The Brits have already gained from the EU, really.This is a case of not understanding the massive payback that comes when you help to develop the underdeveloped nations. More massive than people imagine, and not enough "native" people (Brits, Americans, or otherwise) seem to see development (especially when it comes from immigrants traveling to a natives country to make a higher income - which gets sent back to the immigrants home in part) as a priority that is fundamental to their own (eventual if not immediate) growth.I think this is the fundamental issue.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Not really. The fundamental issue for those that are voting to leave is that they feel that the UK is a small overpopulated island that can't accept immigration at the rate it's happening. It's schools, hospitals, housing, roads and infrastructure can't support it. Inside that is a dislike of how the UK is no longer, they say, British.They're quite happy to play off unverifyable, esoteric and indirect long-term economic benefits against those more obvious and direct disbenefits that they actually see and feel right now.

So you support leaving the EU?

No, I was just explaining the exit argument.

The vote can't be called, there's no history to rely on - but the result looks likely to be close.Tomorrow we vote for something that can't be undone in a generation if ever. It's a big, big thing that will directly affect the lives of my children and theirs.Time for predictions. What will happen on Friday morning if we vote out?I predict a sterling and stock market crash.There'll also be chaos in parliament. Sooner or later - sooner - the PM will be chucked out and the right wingers will have their way until another general election.It frightens me what will happen after that, I can only hope that the undecideds are just as frightened and vote for the status quo.

I've been thinking about what happens in the event of a ridiculously close vote to leave. Legally, the government is under no obligation to obey the referendum results; but politically of course it would be suicidal to ignore a leave vote.But what if the leave vote gets something like 50.2%? It seems to me that it would then be perfectly justifiable to hold a second referendum after we actually know the terms on which Britain would leave. However, I'm sure that would be perceived and treated a underhanded vacillation and an attempt to evade the public will. And the knowledge that a second referendum would follow would be a big incentive for other EU states to refuse any terms even remotely favourable to Britain.