EU Referendum

[BREWSTERS]

Jo Cox murdered?

Anna Lindh - pro-Euro Swedish MP, 46, mother of two, 'murdered' days before Sweden's Euro vote by a lone nutter. Opinion swung heavily in favour of the 'in' side directly after the 'murder'. Coincidence theorists will lap it up.

Few things to consider;

Why was her sister ID'ing the body 36 hours after the event. Why not her husband and next of kin?
Why were her family all smiles when visiting the site? (Typical of supposed bereaved family after staged false flag events).
Why no apparent blood at the scene?
Patsy arrested straight away (police thought he was suspicious because of blood on his hat...a black hat...would it even show up?) Described by all as non-violent, has a mixed race half brother who says he doesn't have a racist bone in his body.
Her birthday is 22 Jun 16...day before the vote - can you imagine the amount of coverage there will be that day? Wouldn't surprise be if they book her funeral for then too.
The guy who owns the dry cleaning centre who the press credited with the story that Mair shouted 'Britain first' has fully denounced that and has even put a note on his shop window: “NO-ONE shouted Britain first at ANY TIME.”
Ultimately motive is a major factor in all investigations. The Anna Lindh 'murder' showed exactly how this event could swing opinion. Motive enough.

 

[websaway]

Jo Cox murdered?

Anna Lindh - pro-Euro Swedish MP, 46, mother of two, 'murdered' days before Sweden's Euro vote by a lone nutter. Opinion swung heavily in favour of the 'in' side directly after the 'murder'. Coincidence theorists will lap it up.

Few things to consider;

Why was her sister ID'ing the body 36 hours after the event. Why not her husband and next of kin?
Why were her family all smiles when visiting the site? (Typical of supposed bereaved family after staged false flag events).
Why no apparent blood at the scene?
Patsy arrested straight away (police thought he was suspicious because of blood on his hat...a black hat...would it even show up?) Described by all as non-violent, has a mixed race half brother who says he doesn't have a racist bone in his body.
Her birthday is 22 Jun 16...day before the vote - can you imagine the amount of coverage there will be that day? Wouldn't surprise be if they book her funeral for then too.
The guy who owns the dry cleaning centre who the press credited with the story that Mair shouted 'Britain first' has fully denounced that and has even put a note on his shop window: “NO-ONE shouted Britain first at ANY TIME.”
Ultimately motive is a major factor in all investigations. The Anna Lindh 'murder' showed exactly how this event could swing opinion. Motive enough.

If I was you I would have quit after the first sentence, it's noteworthy. The rest is midsomer murder stuff. I wouldn't bother .

 

[websaway]

Of course, everyone making their opinion known will have self interest, that's pretty obvious.



The British economy has started to grow again makes it an attractive people for to come, a large percentage of those people will be coming here to work. There's no guarantee that leaving the EU would make any difference to the levels of immigration.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I agree there is no guarantee on immigration but at least it would be in our hands. The PM said he wanted it down to 100,000 . Don't forget that's year on year so still not insignificant. If it was at that level then we could also look at one offs humanitarian immigration. 333,000 per year and rising, ad infinitum, is verging on lunacy. We need to educate our young, not leave them with student loans that will take their lifetimes to clear. ( notice how the universities are flourishing within the EU while poor students are borrowing money to get educated ) Encourage our young that have never been employed to learn skills. Pay decent wages with decent conditions for unskilled workers home grown.

 

[websaway]

From memory.
Gordon Brown after his end to boom and bust hit the rocks, presided over the biggest financial collapse since the great depression.
In 2010 the liberal party surrendered it's principles to form a coalition government with the tories to try and escape from the precipice of disaster that we found ourselves balancing above. Austerity was the answer, accompanied by low interest rates. Austerity hit the poor, low interest rates helped the rich. The divide between rich and poor grew larger and faster than at any time in recent history. We now have a divided country , rich and poor. And the rich are deserting the poor in a way that is nothing less than treacherous . Immigration helps the rich and it ads to the suffering of the poor, less access to hospitals and healthcare, less access to homes, less access to well paid jobs as the minimum wage becomes the maximum wage. Jeremy Corbyn once the champion of the poor said he has no issues with mass uncontrolled immigration and others such as Neil Kinnock who vilified Margaret Thatcher for encouraging modern capitalism and now sits in his robes in the Lords with his big fat unelected EU pension. Any mention from him of the effects immigration has on the poor, not a hope.

 

[websaway]

Well, that would all depend on the deal negotiated with the EU, it would take years & years to iron out the details, I don't think it's going to change anytime soon, regardless of which way the referendum goes.



I think the austerity measures are what have put a strain on the NHS and services, not immigration, it's too easy to blame immigration for all of the problems.

I think your answers are just convenient for your argument.
What kind of a country are we building, don't forget, if we don't like it in 4 years we can't alter it by changing government.
I will ask one more time , how do we accommodate an increase in population the size of Birmingham every 3 years, ad infinitum.
This is not the past, not the blame game. How are we going to house them, where are we going to put them?
Answer that and you've won me over.

 

[BREWSTERS]

If I was you I would have quit after the first sentence, it's noteworthy. The rest is midsomer murder stuff. I wouldn't bother .

You're not alone, unfortunately most people don't bother.

That's why scams work.

 

[AssetDomains]

I don't think you will see any more remain posts on this thread. I think it's job done. Just seen a very pro remain city trading 'expert' on the BBC say that since the murder of Joe Cox the pound has done nothing but rise as public opinion has swung to remain as the murderer was a brexit supporter.

Her death was a disgusting act of violence but will have a significant influence on the vote. This is unfortunate or very fortunate depending on which way you look at it, but just goes to show that where, doom and gloom, stats and figures where not having an influence on the undecideds a human tragedy does. Her murder is totally irrelevant, I would say that most intelligent pro-remain supporters would agree, it has absolutely nothing to do with the EU. To be influenced by it is ridiculous as it's negative influence is one of association, it's like blaming all Muslims for ISIS.

I've always been swaying heavily towards remain I did wonder should the vote have been put back a month to let everything calm down to honest. Probably best not to drag it out to much longer if the campaigning is going to stay as nasty or we could get more tragic incidents

 

[websaway]

You're not alone, unfortunately most people don't bother.

That's why scams work.

Both sides have enough trouble arguing significant facts without arguing immaterial supposition.

 

[websaway]

That's called a debate







This is a problem for all of Europe, and in my opinion, not going to be solved if we leave the EU. I think the leave campaign has been based entirely on fear mongering around immigration. Not to say the remain campaign hasn't been based on fear, I just don't believe that leaving the EU will make any difference to immigration.

I notice you answered the easy bit again. Not one person on here or on the TV has answered the big question.
Where are we going to put an increase in the population the size of Birmingham every 3 years infinitum. How will we house them, where will we put them ?
Not one attempt to answer it.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Both sides have enough trouble arguing significant facts without arguing immaterial supposition.

Immaterial? It's the event which has had THE most profound effect on the public's opinion throughout the whole process.

If the 'victim' had been some 72 year old bloke who barely got noticed in parliament, do you think the effect would've been the same? Aren't the remain camp lucky it wasn't!

 

[websaway]

Immaterial? It's the event which has had THE most profound effect on the public's opinion throughout the whole process.

If the 'victim' had been some 72 year old bloke who barely got noticed in parliament, do you think the effect would've been the same? Aren't the remain camp lucky it wasn't!

Come on, I meant the supposition bit was immaterial. The event is obviously very material.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Come on, I meant the supposition bit was immaterial. The event is obviously very material.

The event is material - and so is the outcome of the event.

Whether the event happened according to the official line is debatable. I don't believe it did. What makes you certain it did?

 

[gimpydog]

Watched DC on Question Time.

He's seems to forget that he went into the negotiations demanding "an emergency brake on immigration".

& came out with "an emergency brake on unlimited numbers of immigrants having to wait a few weeks longer for their benefits".

Way to go Dave.

 

[bonusmedia]

Quick point regarding immigration numbers:

If we take the net migration number as 330,000 per year, that's roughly 0.5% of the population per year.

So in a city the size of Birmingham (about 1.1 million people) that's around 5,500 extra people.

There are around 10,000 empty houses in Birmingham.

It might also be worth pointing out that Birmingham's population peaked in 1951 at 1.13 million and apparently somehow we survived.

Half a percent per year population growth is really not all that difficult to cope with.

Rebalancing the population from the old to the young is vitally important - remember it's the young who pay for the state pensions and healthcare of the old. The baby boomers are retiring and we need healthy young workers to replace them.

Germany has much more of an issue with this since their population has been declining fast. I'd argue that's the main reason they have taken far, far higher numbers of immigrants than we have recently - we've done it more gradually over a longer period. Germany will probably have much greater difficulty adjusting and integrating their new population.

 

[websaway]

That's called a debate







This is a problem for all of Europe, and in my opinion, not going to be solved if we leave the EU. I think the leave campaign has been based entirely on fear mongering around immigration. Not to say the remain campaign hasn't been based on fear, I just don't believe that leaving the EU will make any difference to immigration.

Churchill did want a United States of Europe but did not want us to be a state.

 

[websaway]

Quick point regarding immigration numbers:

If we take the net migration number as 330,000 per year, that's roughly 0.5% of the population per year.

So in a city the size of Birmingham (about 1.1 million people) that's around 5,500 extra people.

There are around 10,000 empty houses in Birmingham.

It might also be worth pointing out that Birmingham's population peaked in 1951 at 1.13 million and apparently somehow we survived.

Half a percent per year population growth is really not all that difficult to cope with.

Rebalancing the population from the old to the young is vitally
important - remember it's the young who pay for the state pensions and healthcare of the old. The baby boomers are retiring and we need healthy young workers to replace them.

Germany has much more of an issue with this since their population has been declining fast. I'd argue that's the main reason they have taken far, far higher numbers of immigrants than we have recently - we've done it more gradually over a longer period. Germany will probably have much greater difficulty adjusting and integrating their new population.

This is helpful , I didn't realise there was a system in place to place people on an annual basis as you have suggested. So 5500 per year to Birmingham, which I'm sure they can cope with. I assume on this basis 430 will go to Kingston upon Thames every year and so on and so on, with an equal dispersion of people all around the country. Some will be delighted to be placed in Canary Wharf. This will certainly be a help and I'm pleased you think it's going to be the case.
And in Birmingham it seems we would, if we compulsorily purchased the 10,000, houses accommodate the Birmingham allocation for at least 4 years. Now how many empty houses around the country to accommodate the other 324,500 per year.
Looking forward to your input. We can tackle this together.

If you were an immigrant born in Birmingham in 1951 it's most likely you would have been born in a room shared with the rest of your family. It was only after that that the estates were built to house the immigrants that were necessary to replace the thousands killed by war and the inner city occupants who's city had been destroyed by war ( defending our sovereignty ) and to man the factories which made Birmingham one of the most industrial cities in the world.

 

[websaway]

https://neweuropeans.net/article/604/revealing-deception-about-winston-churchill

There in Switzerland, Churchill advocated for ‘a kind of United States of Europe’ and that reconciliation and a partnership between France and Germany was crucial to this notion. What Churchill actually meant by this pronouncement has been argued over, endlessly. Churchill of course is well known for his foresight on many issues but often that wisdom can be miss-construed in the contemporary world. Certainly, when Churchill talked of an ‘iron curtain’ bisecting the continent of Europe the Berlin wall was nearly twenty years in the future and even the division of Germany itself was some three years ahead. So when Churchill called for a United States of Europe he did so without a firm idea of what that might look like and, far more saliently as far as the contemporary world is concerned, nor did he specify exactly what the role of the United Kingdom would be, if any, in that unity

 

[VSC]

It was only after that that the estates were built to house the immigrants that were necessary to replace the thousands killed by war and the inner city occupants who's city had been destroyed by war ( defending our sovereignty ) and to man the factories which made Birmingham one of the most industrial cities in the world.

As I understand housing was built to replace the bombed housing and the slums that were in existence, to cope with the increased birth rate after the war, and not specifically built for immigrants ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_the_United_Kingdom

Regarding your earlier post about Britain entering the was to defend it's sovereignty - Britain declared (entered) the war in support of Poland, with whom they had a treaty, after Germany and the Soviet Union invaded.

Interestingly, Birmingham has been voted one of the World's top 10 cities:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...f-the-top-10-cities-in-the-world-9933668.html
Must be doing something right ... and

Cushman & Wakefield European Cities Monitor (2010) - A survey based on the views of 500 European businesses of Europe's leading business cities:
Overall 18th in Europe, 3rd in the UK after London and Manchester, best city to locate a business ...

 

[bonusmedia]

Birmingham has always taken in high levels of immigrants - much higher than it's 'fair share' - and has done well from it. Having lived in Birmingham and Leeds/Bradford I always felt Birmingham had done better on integration.

Of course having more jobs and more wealth always helps - at this point having been neglected and allowed to decline for many years, the North really needs a leg up.

It might be worth pointing out again that the greatest opposition to immigrants tends to be in towns, not the cities, and they tend to have a much smaller immigrant population - fear of the unknown is much greater than fear of the known.

 

[VSC]

... something that I do not believe I have seen debated on this thread is the fact that the UK is spending less as a proportion of GDP on the NHS each year.
Greece spends more as a percentage of GDP on health than the UK does!
Yet some people claim the issue is immigration ... the issue is funding.
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/politic...on-of-gdp-spent-on-nhs-falls/20006371.article
http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/projects/nhs-in-a-nutshell/health-care-spending-compared

... and with Education, overall GDP has hardly changed since the 1970's with spending not increasing with pupil numbers.
http://www.ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/fiscal_facts/public_spending_survey/education