EU Referendum

[AssetDomains]

Big debate on bbc1 now if your not all debated out

 

[martin-s]

To those on this thread drawing attention to immigration - I'd be interested to know what you believe to be the reason that Britain has not halted the rise of non-EU immigration?.

As I have posted previously, there are differences between the pressures non-EU immigrants and EU ones.

Non-EU migrants have to meet certain criteria to be allowed here, and - with the exception of asylum cases - have to prove self sufficiency. Their skills have to be on the in-demand list. They have to have a job offer in place. Their salary has to be £35,000+ to be eligible for a tier 2 visa. Their employer must sponsor them. They're not entitled to state support. They have to pay an NHS surcharge. Those with criminal records may be refused.

This is the sort of system that should be used to manage all immigration. Good logical rules which allow decent and hardworking people to come here at a controlled rate.

 

[martin-s]

We wouldn't be in the eu if we voted out, the election after we leave is the one you get the policies you want. Weather immigration goes up or down will depend on which party gets in. At least we get a choice if we leave

You keep arguing with me, but we're both on the "out" side

 

[martin-s]

Voting remain with a narrow margin may be a signal to the EU ... I don't know (I admit it), but it is a possibility. If we stay in the EU there has to be change - that is an agreement with everyone on the remain side.

Not a single MP, expert or commentator would argue that change isn't necessary.

But not a single MP, expert or commentator believes a vote to remain will deliver substantial change in the areas of this debate that matter to me.

A vote for in doesn't preclude further change, but if you look at the queue of legislation they are sitting on ahead of the vote, it's pretty obvious that the lessons haven't been learned by Brussels yet.

 

[Mark84]

You keep arguing with me, but we're both on the "out" side

haha, I thought that but the remain side are so incoherent you can't always tell what side they are on . They have a habit of agreeing with us but disagreeing at the same time. I totally agree with you though.

On another note, interesting to see that someone has donated £600,000 to the leave campaign turns out to be a former BNP member, or loosely related to one. Very interesting, who donates £600k a few days before the campaign ends?

Call me suspicious but that looks like a plant to me. More dirty tricks, what a sham this thing is.

 

[websaway]

Watched the debate. I was surprised how passionate the remains were.
But none of it point winning, no match winning arguments. Scottish woman is a bit venomous. The leavers were too nice I thought.

I was surprised at the number of people on the gravy train who earn more than the Prime Minister, 10,000. If that figure is correct it's alarming. No wonder so many want to keep the EU growing, no wonder so many MP's want to join the gravy train.

 

[websaway]

surprised they had the mayor on that BBC forum. He calls it a hate campaign if you talk about immigration. Nobody in the leave has brought up terrorist threats as a consequence of free movement and yet his position on that subject is a bit dubious.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-raise-doubts-suitability-London-s-mayor.html

 

[VSC]

But not a single MP, expert or commentator believes a vote to remain will deliver substantial change in the areas of this debate that matter to me.

I question the first part of your statement, but ...
"that matter to you" is the key phrase and why we are having this referendum.
I value your right to have you opinion, point of view - I wouldn't have it any other way.
While I recognise the points you raise, I have a different point of view - one that hopes/expects different outcomes.

Whatever the result on Thursday, I hope that we can all work together to make things better for all of us ... let the result not divide the UK but unite us forward (vain hope perhaps - another sign that I grew up in the 60's, naïve, a dreamer, OPTIMIST!).

 

[dougs]

What you are asking asks us to evaluate the competence of the EU negotiators and the EU commission. As they will be the ones that we will be negotiating with.

If the EU is daft enough to put tariffs on our products entering Europe, they must know that similar tariffs would be put on their products: cars, agriculture etc. If they did so, everybody agrees that they will be doing it to try and punish the UK rather than economic reasons for the EU.

If that is the case - you seem to believe it is likely they will try to punish us for political reasons, why would you want to continue with stupid people negotiating your existing EU deals with the rest of the world which is expanding?

Surely it's a win win, if we leave and they aren't stupid - we get a good deal. If we leave and they are stupid, we get rid of stupid people negotiating our trade deals globally.

Issue is they buy 45% of our stuff, we buy 7% of theirs....not a good negotating start point.

They also can't be really nice to us as others may leave.

 

[dougs]

you make what you want dougy baby, what I suggest is iRobot type production line, then we can actually achieve "physical things" and "grow things", I aim to please, you have not emailed via linkedin for at least a week about a new venture Doug?

The robots are coming no doubts........I don't email you about a venture, sorry not my fault linkedin do it automatically. You need to change your linkedin settings.......

 

[dougs]

3 minute video of the lies told to Norway before they rejected EU membership

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

Sound familiar?

But their prime minster says be warned:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...the-u-k-shouldnt-follow-our-lead-post-brexit/

 

[dougs]

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.

No idea, but we won't get to control it by leaving the EU as freedom of movement is a core principle. In the 80's the Brits went to Germany, in the 00's the Poles came, now many are sending money and going home with new found skills. If the UK gets shit then people will emigrate to a nicer place

 

[dougs]

I lo

But isn't that democracy at work?
Philip Hollobone (Con) has voted 237 times against his party since 2010 ... so is he "full of hate, etc etc"
Indeed, the top 10 MPs to vote against their party since 2010 have been Conservatives ...

Whether you agree or not with what they voted against, it is democracy at work.

If you don't like the way your MP votes, you can vote him out at the next election.

Corbyn has been a sitting MP since 1982, so obviously his electorate like the way he votes.

I love the fact that electorate vote someone in who stands in principle for certain values aligned to a certain party, but has the balls to vote against the party he stands for. If we only had more...

 

[dougs]

It is a supply & demand thing. Reduce the demand (immigration) & the existing supply will be sufficient.

Here's a thought - if immigrants are net contributors to the UK economy, why are we so skint at a time of continued record immigration?

Why hasn't immigration turned around the Greek or Italian economies?

Why are so many other EU states in such a perilous state if the EU is such a good thing? No jobs, but cheaper mobile roaming costs. Great

We borrowed loads of cash after 2008 to bail out many banks, as it was deemed they were too big to fail....as the fall out would be horrible.....agree or disagree that is what happened. Now we have a big debt and interest payments to make.

 

[dougs]

How about this then:

Immigration adds to an economy financially and in many ways.
Let more in
We will hit a tipping point where it may get worse....or maybe it will continue to get better.
At some point it will get worse.
The good people will move some where else and make some where else great.

And so the world roles on...empires rise and fall

 

[Toonz]

As I have posted previously, there are differences between the pressures non-EU immigrants and EU ones.

Non-EU migrants have to meet certain criteria to be allowed here, and - with the exception of asylum cases - have to prove self sufficiency. Their skills have to be on the in-demand list. They have to have a job offer in place. Their salary has to be £35,000+ to be eligible for a tier 2 visa. Their employer must sponsor them. They're not entitled to state support. They have to pay an NHS surcharge. Those with criminal records may be refused.

This is the sort of system that should be used to manage all immigration. Good logical rules which allow decent and hardworking people to come here at a controlled rate.

The problem is that, in a lot of people's minds, it really is about lowering the numbers. You're probably familiar with the schtick - about how Britain is apparently "full up", "we're only a small island, we can't cope", "our public services are stretched", etc etc. Even traffic jams being blamed on immigration. So it seems to me there is this fundamental dishonesty or at least lack of openness resulting from the politicians' need to pander to those seeking a substantial drop in quantity (with talk of lowering the figure to the 10s of thousands) and the reality which is about ensuring that we keep a steady flow of immigrants to address social and economic needs.

 

[Toonz]

The robots are coming no doubts........I don't email you about a venture, sorry not my fault linkedin do it automatically. You need to change your linkedin settings.......

He needs to TAKE. BACK. CONTROL. of his linkedin settings.

 

[dougs]

To those on this thread drawing attention to immigration - I'd be interested to know what you believe to be the reason that Britain has not halted the rise of non-EU immigration?

We're constantly told that immigration is the number one subject of concern to voters, so presumably to lower at least non-EU immigration would be an enormous vote winner, no? So why is it not happening? From a Tory government, no less.

Great point...

 

[Mark84]

Issue is they buy 45% of our stuff, we buy 7% of theirs....not a good negotating start point.

They also can't be really nice to us as others may leave.

The Rotterdam effect means that we have little clue what is really sent to the EU. The Rotterdam effect being that we put goods on a ship to export to China, the ship stops in Rotterdam for a sandwich and they count that as an export from the UK to the EU, even though the goods don't move off the ship.

Even the ONS say they don't really know what the real stats are.

Let's say that your figures are right though, but break it down into countries rather than the EU as a whole because certain countries export significantly more to us than other EU countries.

We all know Germany run the EU, not really a secret. Germany has a 50bn+ euro (it was 54bn in 2014) trade surplus with the UK each year. Why on earth would they risk that?

That's about £41bn trade surplus they'd be kissing bye bye to.

 

[Toonz]

Just as a general reflection, isn't it funny how so many political polls these days (not just EU) seem to split the country near evenly? It's almost as if they've been designed for drama.

That's not an invitation for conspiracy theory btw. (at least not in this thread )