You might want to at least give things six months to a year to "settle", for appropriate definitions of settling. You may feel silly fleeing the UK because of Brexit only to discover that the country you fled to exits as well, or enough other countries exit that there isn't any escape from the problem. Or, more relevant than perhaps "feeling silly", you might spend an awful lot of money only to end up in the same place anyhow.

The pressures that led to Brexit are not unique to the UK, and have been building for many years. Maybe it'll be unique. Maybe it'll be contained. In fact, maybe it won't even happen. It hasn't happened yet. But with at least similar order-of-magnitude probability, maybe by this time next year one to three other countries will have exited to some extent as well. If you mistake your own political inclinations or beliefs for what is actually likely, no-one will save you from the consequences of your error. It's easy to spin Brexit as a fluke, but it's pretty easy to spin it as a bellweather, too.

That was a consideration a week ago, but since then, EU countries have been galvanised to be more pro-EU.

Don't forget leaving only for Britain never to invoke Article 50...

I fail to see what the panic is about. Britain will not want to lose access to the single market, so it is inevitable that nothing will materially change regarding immigration. Look at Switzerland whose citizens voted to control EU immigration and are now being told it is impossible. Even implementing a policy which says Switzerland can limit immigration to job sectors where the unemployment level is high is meeting resistance. And why is immigration such a worry anyhow. It is not like Britain would never have immigration. Last time I looked the USA startup scene does not seem to struggle even though they do not have an open borders policy with nearby countries.

AFAIK all the treaties Switzerland has with the European Union include a guillotine clause that cancels all treaties when one is broken. This is due to the difficulty getting the required number of member countries into agreement on treaties. This mean that if Switzerland instituted policies infringing on the free movement treaties, it'd need to renegotiate every single other treaty, potentially with less favorable terms, and long negotiation periods, during which Switzerland is effectively cut off from the rest of the EU. It's not impossible, but doesn't seem worth the cost for something that size.

I have written an analysis of what might happen next year in Switzerland and elsewhere:

https://medium.com/@octskyward/ok-what-now-e3f64d38f7#.q4vch...

It is almost without question that the Swiss will hold another referendum in the coming months, as their deadline for implementing the previous referendum's legislation (which they are legally bound to do) will expire in February. However due to the latency on getting new laws through Parliament they really have to start now.

There is no way to renegotiate with the EU because the EU sees any geographically European population that chooses to defy the EU as some kind of terrorist, with whom negotiation is unthinkable. They refused to negotiate with the Swiss and are now demanding the Swiss join the EU proper or else there won't be any further negotiations (ever). The Swiss do not want to join the EU. So the stage is set for a showdown.

The best case outcome for the EU is a new vote in which the Swiss choose to continue the status quo for a little while longer.

To add to your point about the USA, how many trade tariffs tend to apply to service-based companies with a tech focus (i.e. the majority of tech startups)?

From what I've seen, the answer is pretty much none. So long as barriers to tech talent aren't put in place, there's basically nothing holding back the UK tech scene. The fear being generated by the media (along with those that repeat those fears without critical examination) is more damaging than the situation as it stands today. We're talking about something that only happened within the last few weeks, the sky isn't falling, it's all a failure of perception.

Completely agree. A full brexit could actually be beneficial for Britain as we could get tech talent from anywhere i.e. a level playing field for the whole world, not preference to those countries geographically nearby. I do not think it will happen though.

The main reason Leave won is because there was strong popular demand for "control of immigration", which implies leaving the Single Market. That doesn't mean the government won't quietly disregard that, but it does mean it's considerably less likely we take a Norway-like approach than it would have been if the public was instead obsessed with minutae like the Common Fisheries Policy or European Court of Justice.

Immigration restrictions are the least of worries for UK-based startups not focusing on the domestic market though, especially in fintech which has traditionally been London's strength. If you need company registrations, offices, contract and potentially even servers and compliance staff to be based in the EU to comply with certain regulations, it suddenly makes a lot less sense to spend all the extra overheads of having your [main] office in London, especially if other startups on the scene are starting to migrate and you don't want multiple offices. And whilst EU negotiators might want to avoid tariffs regardless of whether the UK stays in the Single Market or not, they have very little reason to secure trade agreements with the UK that grant UK firms passporting rights.

Immigration is a worry because it is no longer simply intra-EU nations allowing free movement of their members, but the millions of low-skilled Middle East and North African migrants who've entered the EU in the last few years will be a strain on nation's finances for decades. Couple this with the aging of Europe and automation on the horizon and there is not the need nor the capability to sustain the new EU residents.

If you disagree I'd enjoy a thoughtful response

California has open borders with the other members of the United States.

Almost open: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Department_of_Food_...

I'm on the same boat.

But, as counter arguments I see that,

a) there is a big(?) risk for Europe itself to fall apart within the next couple of years,

b) those cities cannot possibly replace London in the next few years. I think they'll probably share the "tech" that London will lose, and the gap will shorten between them and London.

Also, by being a contractor in the UK, I now see that this nice tax efficient way of working, does not apply in other countries, Germany for example. So after all, London might still be more attractive for some. ( Ltd tax might fall even more for example )

I wouldn't underestimate the language aspect too.

You might get away in a restaurant in Berlin speaking only english, but it's no fun to live in a country where you can't understand anything written, whether it is to fill your taxes, or interact with your bank, or where every website will be localized to the local language.

If you and your whole team speak Dutch and Spanish and German, then of course you can hesitate between London, Amsterdam, Barcelona or Berlin.

True, that's another big reason for people to not move out of the UK. I've worked in Germany before, and I left mainly because of the language.

Why not just learn German? It's relatively close to English and one of the more useful languages to know.

Having spent many years living in Switzerland (and learning German), it's really hard for people in our industry to do that. Maybe if you work as a bartender all day you'll get fluent fast, but in the software business the entire industry is oriented around English, so you tend to use English all day even in places where most of your colleagues are from other European countries.

And you want to make friends, right? Well, there are lots of other people who want to make friends too: other foreigners who moved there. Who also don't speak the local language.

So you end up finding that learning German or whatever ends up being not much easier than doing so in high school: your opportunities to practice are limited. I have learned it, but basically through just doing lessons. My best Swiss friend comes from the French speaking part, so that was no help.

Excuses, excuses

> your opportunities to practice are limited

I spent 1 weekend in Zurich. I had a lot of opportunities to practice, falling back to English only when needed.

Then I went to Germany for a bit and again had endless opportunities to practice.

You still have to deal with eating, shopping, renting a place, going to a doctor, etc.

If the first thing that comes out of your mouth is "English, bitte?", yeah, you're not learning anything.

And the other foreigners there? Some have better German than English. They also want to learn.

One weekend is not what I'd call "a lot of opportunities". If you think it is then we're discussing different levels of fluency. I'm quite conversational in German. I would not say I have a lot of opportunities to practice because restaurant and supermarket German are so simple they don't help me get any better.

Swiss people learn English in school. I have only met a few who cannot speak English well. It's a much more common issue that I want to speak German with them, but they don't actually like German (it's something of a foreign language too compared to dialect), and they prefer to practice their English with me. Linguistic tugs of war are always awkward.

> One weekend is not what I'd call "a lot of opportunities". If you think it is then we're discussing different levels of fluency. I'm quite conversational in German

I fully agree with you, I was at a beginner's level on that occasion. Yes, if you are conversational then it's not going to change much (from your original post it seemed you barely spoke German)

And yes, the way to progress from conversational to the upper levels is mainly through classes

> but they don't actually like German (it's something of a foreign language too compared to dialect)

Ah that's true. Nobody speaks Hochdeutsch on everyday life. And Schweizerdeutsch is weird

It takes time. I was actually working and taking German classes after work. But that adds to frustration, since you get more tired and you still don't understand anything because it takes a lot of time to get proficient.

It is funny that people in the start-up industry are unwilling to be 'agile' about languages. Personally, I'm terrible at learning languages, but limiting myself to potentially a hazardous place to live in just because they speak english, is not a great reason.

That is a more serious issue but there's the option of Dublin/Ireland and other places where the population is English-fluent and everything is available in English.

In Amsterdam speaking English is well accepted.

The EU falling apart? Unlikely. Mainstream politicians have learned their lesson, which is never offer up such a dumb referendum to their electorate, even one which you would be "certain" to win.

The Eurozone: Not in the next 2 years, but the structures are fundamentally unsound so something will have to give. Most likely outcome is further political and economic integration of the Eurozone members which would avoid a breakup at the cost of being unpopular. There's just too much trade that depends on the Euro.

> Mainstream politicians have learned their lesson, which is never offer up such a dumb referendum to their electorate

Not if "non-mainstream" politicians win election. Not unlikely at all at this moment.

What you simply push aside as a dumb referendum because you do not agree with it, is silly considering your thoughts are not an accurate reflection of the issues with the EU and polling of its members.

>Polls recently conducted in Italy, France, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Czech Republic and Hungary also showed that these countries could follow Britain if it succeeds in leaving the EU. Euroskeptic politicians in these countries have been adding fuel to the fire, stepping up their calls for EU-exits in light of the British referendum.

On Wednesday, French right-wing leader Marine Le Pen stressed that France should have its own ‘Frexit’ vote.

“What I'm asking for is a referendum in France. Every EU member should be able to have its say in a referendum,” the National Front leader told France's TF1 television. A March poll by the University of Edinburgh found that 53 percent of the French are in favor of a referendum on leaving the Union.

30% of Germans want to quit EU as support for Merkel’s govt. drops below 50% While a YouGov poll in May, commissioned by Handelsblatt newspaper, found that 29 percent of Germans would leave the EU if a referendum was to take place. Only 54 percent of those living in the country supported staying in the bloc.

The mood is reportedly the same in the Netherlands, with a February opinion poll finding that 53 percent of Dutch citizens want a 'Nexit' referendum. Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch right-wing, populist PVV party, currently topping opinion polls, openly expressed hopes a ‘Nexit’ could follow a ‘Brexit.’ https://www.rt.com/viral/348039-brexit-eu-referendum-domino/

Labeling the referendum as dumb is IMHO accurate, not because of the outcome, but because of the way it was done. It takes an extremely complex matter and puts it into an simple yes no questions without discussing the consequences. What does it even mean to leave the EU? A lot of leave voters seemed to take it as stopping immigration, which will not happen (since a lot of immigration is coming from outside the EU and freedom of movement with EU states will likely not be removed).

In comparision, the Scotish referendum was more detailed and got a lot more debate. The blog article "Brexit was a con" explains that in the first part: https://medium.com/@kirstymhall/brexit-was-a-con-67532113a7c...

And how would you do it?

There was plenty of discussion of the consequences, heck, the remain campaign focused more or less ONLY on the consequences of the EU's economic retaliation.

Leaving the EU will absolutely allow immigration to be pushed down, though likely not to the "tens of thousands per year" figure that seems to have been arbitrarily chosen simply because that'd result in too many very useful and in-demand people being excluded. But the type of immigration that has caused so much malcontent in the regions can absolutely be close to eliminated, i.e. poor unskilled workers coming from eastern Europe and undercutting the wages of the locals.

Are you asking how I would do the referendum? Certainly not with a 16 page manifesto and basically asking "Wanna leave the EU?" It should have included considerations what would happen with Northern Ireland, Scotland and Gibraltar.

How will leaving the EU push immigration down? As I pointed out, a good deal of immigration coming from outside the EU. And the EU part will probably not be affected by Brexit either, because free movement is tied to free trade. Or do you think that the UK will give up free trade with the EU?

Free trade and free movement are unrelated, as evidenced by the fact that the EU is trying to sign free trade deals with Canada and the United States. It's only countries geographically in Europe that are told they must accept both or neither.

The EU will either sign a free trade deal with the UK of some sort (possibly not as free as within the single market), or it will simply fuel its own collapse.

Actually, you and the parent are not quite right on the free trade issue v movement of people issue. It is the single market in services that is tied to notions of free movement of people. The free trade and restrictions on movement of people is not controversial.

Thanks for the correction.

It was a dumb referendum because it pitted a specific, known option (remain in the EU) against a complete unknown. The unknown option won by cobbling together a coalition of several different, mutually exclusive agendas (some of which were/are based on fantasies, like the EU giving the UK free access to the common market while choosing which regulations it would follow), thus guaranteeing that there's probably no conceivable exit deal that more than 20% of the country (certainly nowhere near 52%) would be happy with, and even more than 80% will be unhappy with the one that is eventually negotiated.

You don't have to be pro-EU to see this as a bad way to run a country (although it helps).

The "complete unknown" is not actually unknown. Just look at any country that is not in the EU.

The exact details of a relationship post-Brexit are impossible to know because the EU refuses to even contemplate such a possibility, let alone discuss it. That's a problem of their own creation however, and that attitude is exactly what has stoked the fires of euroscepticism across the continent. You can sometimes put off reality by denying it, but not forever.

> The "complete unknown" is not actually unknown. [...] The exact details of a relationship post-Brexit are impossible to know.

I'm confused. Do you agree or disagree with zb that the referendum pitted a well known against a complete unknown?

Not knowing every detail does not make something a "complete unknown".

I don't know why people are downvoting you - there certainly is a danger from far right politicians. Personally I don't see it actually happening (especially given the negative example from Brexit), but it's a possibility.

I think people only read the first sentence of most posts, and your first sentence is wrong -- everything about this referendum was dumb.

It was dumb to have the referendum in the first place. Cameron had it in order to try to resolve an internal Tory party dispute.

It was dumb to have a 50:50 threshold. A massive constitutional change should require a supermajority.

The arguments (on all sides) were largely lies.

And the outcome won't even be what anyone wants. The leavers won't get what they voted for. Almost everyone will be shafted.

I don't think it was dumb to have a referendum. I think a lot of the problems with the European project stem from perception that folk at the top are pulling a fast one over their populations - people should decide when the basis of their government changes. But the circumstance by which the referendum came about was farcical.

I don't disagree with the rest of what you say, but I would add that a government that puts together a referendum that is not a foregone conclusion, that does not prepare for an adverse decision, is incompetent and negligent enough to be considered criminal.

Most EU nationals I know qualify or will shortly qualify for citizenship. Just a little bit of paperwork to do once.

The US has a very restrictive visa system. It didn't prevent the development of the silicon valley.

Just a bit of paperwork: Exam, a few hundred pounds in fees and yes, paperwork to get a British passport. On the other hand, other cities don't require any of that... You can keep your passport and still be accepted by the country. Keep in mind not all countries accept double nationally, so there's a chance someone would have to choose between their original passport (which would be an EU passport) and a watered down British one.

Also, what about their families? Not all of them are single white males in their 20s. Their partners would probably want to keep working, not necessarily on qualified jobs that could grant a visa anywhere in the world.

What I'm saying is that is not as easy as it might seem. People have different situations to account for.

You mean moving your house, family and business to another country which language you do not speak and will have to learn is less work and expensive than passing an exam you can prepare over a week end and a couple of forms to post in the mail?

Besides, having passed that exam myself I actually think it was a good experience. I learned a few things about the UK.

Wouldn't the first apply to moving to the UK too?

Language I can see, but then the German Abitur has a requirement of 2 foreign languages, with potentially 3 (English/French, French/Latin, last one depending on what the school offers, usually Spanish/Italian/I think Russian in NE/sometimes Chinese). Some of these languages are substantially similar, which further widens the field, e.g., a French speaker might transition to Italian easily.

A fair number of Europeans are ridiculously multilingual.

If by multilingual you meaning speaking english in addition to their mother tongue, I agree. If by multilingual you mean speaking fluently another non english language I disagree, only a small minority do. Particularly in a population of technical people (since we are taking about start ups).

In my experience, even educated young urban Germans are mostly not actually fluent (C2) in English. They can just about hold a conversation (probably B2). Many of them speak French only a little worse than that.

Either way, they'd need to learn more if they wanted to have a normal life in an English-speaking country.

If your family can't stay or can't develop their professional careers in the UK then yes, moving somewhere else is easier than a life full of misery and regrets.

We're talking about non-UK EU nationals in Britain so chances are they're moving back to their families, support networks, and native language.

I am a non-UK EU national in Britain, so I'm saying all this first hand.

So you don't speak the native language of the country you might go back to? I'm certain there are emigrees who came to the UK very young whose parents wanted them to assimilate, but somehow I doubt that's the majority. There will also be people, especially Eastern Europeans, who will want to move to a different EU country than their origin, but again this is the same kind of move they made to the UK to begin with, unless English language education has gotten much better since I lived there.

I'm not sure I get your point or what are you trying to explain / show / support.

Citizenship might be unnecessary, though. People could apply for permanent resident cards. It looks like currently there's no such procedure for EEA residents, since they already have that right.

https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-a-uk-residence-card/permanent-r...

Another option is Switzerland - the startup scene is starting to take off since the finance industry here have started invest in e.g. http://www.businessinsider.com/sc/fintech-startups-in-switze...

It is quite plausible that the Swiss will have their own "Swixit" by next year, because avoiding it now requires another referendum to undo the effects of a previous referendum that would result in automatic cancellation of most (all?) EU/Swiss treaties. Also, the EU has been playing hardball with the Swiss lately, and they don't like it one bit.

I understand Berlin being a logical choice for a relocation but I haven't heard much about Amsterdam and Barcelona in terms of the tech and start up environment. Are they on par with Berlin or are they "up and comers"?

I am also curios, are there practical reasons outside of the start up tech environment that are making you consider Barcelona and Amsterdam.

Wages for tech people in Barcelona at least are dramatically worse than in places like London.

Amsterdam looks more attractive (much better levels of English as well), but the Netherlands is one of the countries most likely to go through an EU referendum within the next 18 months as well.

Are you just speculating regarding a Dutch referendum? Was this gaining momentum prior to the Brexit vote? This is the first I've heard of it.

Don't panic. Wait until the dust has settled (maybe a year) and then start taking decisions. I'm certain everything will look much less dramatic by then.

How is emigration to Europe going to work while the UK leaves the EU? Might you have to go back and reapply for visas?

Depends on the terms of our exit. Free movement is still on the table for the likely winner of the Conservative leadership.

Well, this is exactly what the brexiters asked for. Good Jobs becoming available to them.