|
Post by manchestergas on Jun 25, 2016 22:00:53 GMT
County, but is it not the result not how it is achieved. I suspect many on the Leave side (maybe not you) will be disappointed if migration levels do not fall. If they stay high for economic reasons i.e. we are successful outside the EU will that not disappoint some who voted Leave. I really hope we are. There is the argument migrants, and I concentrate on EU migrants, we could always control non-EU migration, put pressure on social facilities, however crap social facilities is not the EUs fault, but the UK governments. I can only speak for myself, if it economically worthwhile to have immigrants then great I'll be happy with that as for other people they have to speak for themselves that's the benefit of living in a democracy, and possible why some people leave where they live to come here. Perhaps people should try to spread the right to democracy and free speech in other countries. In honestly people haven't the balls to do that. County, not sure everyone on the Leave side completely accept your view. They just what immigration down whatever the state of our economy. Also I would argue most of the people that Farage wants to stop are from democracies. We could always stop Iraqis and Syrians. By the way I thought Merkel was a fool last summer accepting millions of syrians and god knows who else into Germany.
|
|
|
Post by tanksfull on Jun 25, 2016 22:02:00 GMT
Sorry, I genuinly do not understand the question or the point (if there is one)? I gave a specific example of the positives of immigration. Do I want to see my environment changed with people and situations I'm not comfortable with? Who would? I feel deeply for those in Lincolnshire whose lives have been drastically changed. I do not think that is racist. The point is there are jobs which need to be carried out and those currently in the area either do not want to do them or they all have employment; otherwise the immigrants would not be there and not be needed. If they don't come in through free movement they would likely come in through a visa. I'm not quite sure what the difference is. I'm not sure how leaving the EU has changed anything on the immigration front? I would love to hear other people's views on what will change. Well obviously there is a difference that you can't understand. In the EU anyone can come here regardless whether we need them or not. Outside the Eu we can decide if we need people or not. Is that to complicated for you to understand? And why do they come here? Specifically because there are jobs here for them to earn money. I fully understand the difference however what I asked was what would be the result in having control? Will control reduce the numbers? Yes you are totally correct on your other post. If the economy reduces so will the immigration numbers; but not as a result of "control".
|
|
aghast
David Williams
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 395
|
Post by aghast on Jun 25, 2016 22:06:53 GMT
I think this is an excellent thread which generally reflects the views of most people, in a non-personal well-reasoned way; in other words a roughly 50:50 split on whether we should have opted to remain or leave. Ok, 52:48. Contrast that with the Gaschat thread, which is overwhelmingly Brexit. I am not criticising in any way the right of the Brexiters on Gaschat to put forward their views, but I'm disappointed that very few others on the opposite side feel willing or able to say what they think. I have no idea why that might be so.
I haven't posted on here for a long while. Not because I don't like it, but I suppose because there's more to read and comment on over there.
I think this thread demonstrates why a general chat section could now be re-introduced, if moderated.
It also shows that Gaschat is a great place for a laugh, but not necessarily a great place for a sensible debate. I suppose everyone knows that already.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2016 22:18:18 GMT
I'm not disputing the result or signing the petition. I'm just saying that people have no idea what they've voted for or are going to get. Basically we're going to park up in a lay-by while what is effectively a right wing coup decides what it wants to do with us. That might suit the old guard who voted for it, but it's likely to hit the other demographic, that voted to kick the establishment, the hardest. How does it help the forgotten people to lose non-natives, given that they contribute to the tax base, boost the economy generally, and and help to generate support jobs?
Like others, I'll be alright (but would have preferred a more constructive approach to the world). I just don't see the merit in making life difficult for ourselves, and for the life of me can't see any benefit.
Can anybody explain the benefit?
|
|
|
Post by tanksfull on Jun 25, 2016 22:22:38 GMT
Of course it is not racist. However, please explain your understanding of the difference between "open door immigration" and "controlled immigration" specifically where the EU is concerned? I'm referring to the actual/practical result not the theory. Will we have less people coming in to the country? Because we currently have the highest level of employment for many, many years we will still have the same amount of immigration and substantially increase the cost of administering it. Why do we "foreign" have doctors and nurses? In the UK we already have £1.8m workers from the EU and £2m workers from the "rest of the world". If we are to grow and become richer where do we get the extra employees from? Well according to the Remain camp everything I'd doom and gloom after voting Leave so obviously immigration will fall as why would Europeans or non Europeans want to come to a failing economy? Oh you're saying we'll still be a successful economy and people will still want to come. Perhaps you should consider your views on the success of the UK Well that is one way of reducing immigration but a completely different discussion. A simple example: If you were the owner of a car manufacturing company in the USA or Japan or China or South Korea and were looking to export to the largest economic block in the world (the EU) where would you now invest your money? To date it has been the UK. Who will do that now even if we do avoid the levy? We had an incredibly privileged place within the EU where inward investment was concerned. It has now gone. Anyone looking to "export" to the EU will no longer be considering the UK for its assembly. So yes I think we will successfully reduce immigration along with prosperity. By the way we will lose the skilled jobs provided by outside investment. Those unemployed can then go and do the fruit and crop picking and other low paid jobs which are currently the province of the immigrants? Just my thoughts. I really hope I am wrong...
|
|
|
Post by tanksfull on Jun 25, 2016 22:26:33 GMT
I'm not disputing the result or signing the petition. I'm just saying that people have no idea what they've voted for or are going to get. Basically we're going to park up in a lay-by while what is effectively a right wing coup decides what it wants to do with us. That might suit the old guard who voted for it, but it's likely to hit the other demographic, that voted to kick the establishment, the hardest. How does it help the forgotten people to lose non-natives, given that they contribute to the tax base, boost the economy generally, and and help to generate support jobs? Like others, I'll be alright (but would have preferred a more constructive approach to the world). I just don't see the merit in making life difficult for ourselves, and for the life of me can't see any benefit. Can anybody explain the benefit? We can spend £350m a week X 3.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2016 22:33:03 GMT
There is the argument migrants, and I concentrate on EU migrants, we could always control non-EU migration, put pressure on social facilities, however crap social facilities is not the EUs fault, but the UK governments. Problem is, growth in society is normally organic, and infrastructure with it, that's not what's happened since uncontrolled EU migration started. Not a comment on whether that migration is a good or bad thing, just a reply to the point you make.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2016 22:37:36 GMT
I'm not disputing the result or signing the petition. I'm just saying that people have no idea what they've voted for or are going to get. Basically we're going to park up in a lay-by while what is effectively a right wing coup decides what it wants to do with us. That might suit the old guard who voted for it, but it's likely to hit the other demographic, that voted to kick the establishment, the hardest. How does it help the forgotten people to lose non-natives, given that they contribute to the tax base, boost the economy generally, and and help to generate support jobs? Like others, I'll be alright (but would have preferred a more constructive approach to the world). I just don't see the merit in making life difficult for ourselves, and for the life of me can't see any benefit. Can anybody explain the benefit? We can spend £350m a week X 3. Well, the gullible can try. A gnat off the growth rate, and the real figure's wiped out anyway. Isn't that part of the despair, that they were able to (and resorted to) peddle that nonsense, and an opinion poll said people believed it? Haven't many of them spent the last six years saying we had to reduce the deficit? That went out of the window. You want spending? We can afford it. Apparently. Some people are in for a shock.
|
|
shakes
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 122
|
Post by shakes on Jun 26, 2016 0:26:06 GMT
One benefit with BREXIT is that we, as a general population, are to become more economically literate but only because of our future experiences and hindsight!!
|
|
shakes
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 122
|
Post by shakes on Jun 26, 2016 1:10:12 GMT
Perhaps the other relevant question is would we be under new ownership of brexit was six months earlier? The al-qadi's have a long term aim of premier league football but is the whole basis of the financial bubble of the premier league now just a bit more likely to burst?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 5:15:57 GMT
Of course it is not racist. However, please explain your understanding of the difference between "open door immigration" and "controlled immigration" specifically where the EU is concerned? I'm referring to the actual/practical result not the theory. Will we have less people coming in to the country? Because we currently have the highest level of employment for many, many years we will still have the same amount of immigration and substantially increase the cost of administering it. Why do we "foreign" have doctors and nurses? In the UK we already have £1.8m workers from the EU and £2m workers from the "rest of the world". If we are to grow and become richer where do we get the extra employees from? Well according to the Remain camp everything I'd doom and gloom after voting Leave so obviously immigration will fall as why would Europeans or non Europeans want to come to a failing economy? Oh you're saying we'll still be a successful economy and people will still want to come. Perhaps you should consider your views on the success of the UK I see the debate has fallen on to immigration as the key issue. I do smile when Brexiteers promote Controlled Immigration over free movement. Controlled by whom? Oh the government. Great so now we have politically motivated people making decisions on the recruitment needs of private companies. Wasn't red tape supposed to be an issue? As Tanksfull indicated it is demand that fuels economic migration, putting a layer of pen pushing won't change that.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jun 26, 2016 7:29:05 GMT
What would be interesting would be the views of the 26/27% that didnt vote. Did they not know enough?, did they think it all bollox, did they think it should be left up to those we already elected? Why would it be interesting? People decided they couldn't be bothered to vote, in many ways it's like people not voting for or against the fans directors. Um no. Surely knowing why you didnt vote leave or remain or didnt want to reelect Ken Masters or BSS is as important if not more so than knowing how people did If the politicians.dont connect with he whole UK or you dont connect with your fan base than surely like any business you want/need to know why
|
|
|
Post by gasheadpirate on Jun 26, 2016 7:47:25 GMT
It was a binary vote, yes or no. No Parliamentary constituencies, boundary changes, tactical voting. Pure Democracy and democracy won. All these people whining about the vote. Compared to three terms of Mrs T. and the Currie Shagger this is a walk in the park ffs!!! So if the vote had been to Remain, would democracy had lost? Silly question really. It was s two horse race, whoever came first won - that is democracy.
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Jun 26, 2016 8:40:21 GMT
Well according to the Remain camp everything I'd doom and gloom after voting Leave so obviously immigration will fall as why would Europeans or non Europeans want to come to a failing economy? Oh you're saying we'll still be a successful economy and people will still want to come. Perhaps you should consider your views on the success of the UK I see the debate has fallen on to immigration as the key issue. I do smile when Brexiteers promote Controlled Immigration over free movement. Controlled by whom? Oh the government. Great so now we have politically motivated people making decisions on the recruitment needs of private companies. Wasn't red tape supposed to be an issue? As Tanksfull indicated it is demand that fuels economic migration, putting a layer of pen pushing won't change that. Possibly for you but not for me, for myself it was always about the economy & trading with those parts of the world that exactly exist outside the EU. But it would seem that you & Tanksful believe the EU will cut off it's own nose to spite it's face. But no-one in the Remain camp has explained why it would be a positive move by the EU to start a trade war, ultimately I don't think they will, but if they do it will just prove that the Leave camp were correct in pointing out that the EU is very insular & not really interested or focused on trade with countries outside the EU. As to the immigration point I'm quite happy with people coming here to work (& indeed most of then work exceedingly hard) but successive governments have used that immigration as cheap labour so that they don't have to deal with real issues like making the unemployed (what is the official rate now 1.6m?) here actually work & paying them to not work. If there are so many jobs being taken by immigrants why would any sane person pay people not to work? Then you get to the control issue, yes controlled by the government (are you aware of anywhere else in the world that supports uncontrolled immigration?), both in terms of the skills required by the economy (I mean was or economy & way of life in danger of collapsing because there were not enough car washers?) but also the quality of people unfortunately we breed enough murderers (as shown with the despicable murder of the MP) & rapists to not need to import them. But perhaps murderers & rapists is the collateral damage that people like yourself believe is a price worth paying for freedom of movement?
|
|
lostinspace
Vic Lambden
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 5,216
Member is Online
|
Post by lostinspace on Jun 26, 2016 8:53:16 GMT
Well according to the Remain camp everything I'd doom and gloom after voting Leave so obviously immigration will fall as why would Europeans or non Europeans want to come to a failing economy? Oh you're saying we'll still be a successful economy and people will still want to come. Perhaps you should consider your views on the success of the UK Well that is one way of reducing immigration but a completely different discussion. A simple example: If you were the owner of a car manufacturing company in the USA or Japan or China or South Korea and were looking to export to the largest economic block in the world (the EU) where would you now invest your money? To date it has been the UK. Who will do that now even if we do avoid the levy? We had an incredibly privileged place within the EU where inward investment was concerned. It has now gone. Anyone looking to "export" to the EU will no longer be considering the UK for its assembly. So yes I think we will successfully reduce immigration along with prosperity. By the way we will lose the skilled jobs provided by outside investment. Those unemployed can then go and do the fruit and crop picking and other low paid jobs which are currently the province of the immigrants? Just my thoughts. I really hope I am wrong... www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3497621/Boeing-s-Brexit-boost-World-s-largest-aircraft-maker-picks-Britain-home-new-European-headquarters.html
|
|
|
Post by tanksfull on Jun 26, 2016 9:16:15 GMT
Well that is one way of reducing immigration but a completely different discussion. A simple example: If you were the owner of a car manufacturing company in the USA or Japan or China or South Korea and were looking to export to the largest economic block in the world (the EU) where would you now invest your money? To date it has been the UK. Who will do that now even if we do avoid the levy? We had an incredibly privileged place within the EU where inward investment was concerned. It has now gone. Anyone looking to "export" to the EU will no longer be considering the UK for its assembly. So yes I think we will successfully reduce immigration along with prosperity. By the way we will lose the skilled jobs provided by outside investment. Those unemployed can then go and do the fruit and crop picking and other low paid jobs which are currently the province of the immigrants? Just my thoughts. I really hope I am wrong... www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3497621/Boeing-s-Brexit-boost-World-s-largest-aircraft-maker-picks-Britain-home-new-European-headquarters.htmlI saw that yesterday and it's excellent news. When did the negotiations start? Let's look at the stats in one, two and three years time and see how investment develops.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,225
|
Post by eppinggas on Jun 26, 2016 9:21:21 GMT
Open door EU immigration is a massive problem. That is why "Leave" won. Controlled immigration is something the political elite refused to contemplate (well they can't because they are bound by EU law / EU freedom of movement). Being opposed to open door EU immigration does not make anyone racist. At least we can continue to have that debate now without being called openly racist. I certainly am not. As a consequence of this Referendum - the Labour Party will get torn apart. Labour heartlands like Hartlepool (Mandelsons old constituency - excuse me while I P*ss myself) were the reason we voted out. Labour will get wiped out in England - just like they did in Scotland. I'm a right-winger. But the death of decent opposition to a Tory Government (whoever that may be) worries me. Of course it is not racist. However, please explain your understanding of the difference between "open door immigration" and "controlled immigration" specifically where the EU is concerned? I'm referring to the actual/practical result not the theory. Will we have less people coming in to the country? Because we currently have the highest level of employment for many, many years we will still have the same amount of immigration and substantially increase the cost of administering it. Why do we "foreign" have doctors and nurses? In the UK we already have £1.8m workers from the EU and £2m workers from the "rest of the world". If we are to grow and become richer where do we get the extra employees from? Happy to answer your question. Good to see debate on here is a lot better than was had between "respected politicians" before the vote. (What a great example of an oxymoron). I think if we just look at the Australian model - you know the previously "racist" one - where they look at a points system for who they let in. We should now apply that here - obviously we treat EU and non-EU just the same. We need SOME immigration. That's why it is great that the NHS have a number non-British doctors and nurses. We need ever more doctors and nurses to treat the ever expanding population (additional 330,00 last year). So we need to reduce that 330,00 number. A lot. We are not growing at the rate that the population is! What has average GDP growth been over the last 10 years - I'll tell you - less than 0.5%. We are not a massive growth economy - but we are a better prospect for immigrants. Our NHS can't cope. Our Schools cannot cope. Out Housing Infrastructure cannot cope. Up until the last 5 years or so I believe that net immigration has had a positive effect on the economy. It is my belief that we have now gone passed the tipping point. People who are pro-EU / pro immigration don't think that. That is where the fundamental difference lies in the IN / OUT debate. The Referendum has always been about immigration. Large swathes of the country see immigration as the single biggest problem we have. ie the Labour heartlands and largely everyone in England who doesn't actually live in London. Cameron screwed himself. Said he hadn't made up his mind until he had re-negotiated our EU position. The EU said "p*ss off". Cameron then claimed victory and that he was voting for Remain. Dead in the water right there. He also maintained that he could keep net immigration down to tens of thousands. That was a LIE. Dead in the water. As for our previous leader Blair. Signed up to open door EU immigration that has led to the the huge increase in EU immigration. He started wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya that have de-stabilised the Middle East and led to - yup you guessed it - a huge increase in non-EU immigration crisis. Thanks Tony. Happy to carry on the debate.
|
|
lostinspace
Vic Lambden
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 5,216
Member is Online
|
Post by lostinspace on Jun 26, 2016 9:44:43 GMT
I saw that yesterday and it's excellent news. When did the negotiations start? Let's look at the stats in one, two and three years time and see how investment develops. the negotiations will have began prior to the vote being made, but having seen the result they have still confirmed their intentions, obviously these contracts may have monetary clauses in them on a decision made one way or another, this may have had a bearing on the announcement who knows..... , the biggest threat to any other company coming here to operate, financially or manufacturing will be the "powers that be" within the EU, Junkers [it seems] is going to be so anti british, will put barriers in the way of free enterprise from companies operating in the EU wishing to migrate to the UK, this is one of the main problems the EU has generated, the financial obstructions put in the way of free trade of one country from outside of europe wishing to trade with a member country.. the 27 or 28?
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Jun 26, 2016 9:51:27 GMT
Of course it is not racist. However, please explain your understanding of the difference between "open door immigration" and "controlled immigration" specifically where the EU is concerned? I'm referring to the actual/practical result not the theory. Will we have less people coming in to the country? Because we currently have the highest level of employment for many, many years we will still have the same amount of immigration and substantially increase the cost of administering it. Why do we "foreign" have doctors and nurses? In the UK we already have £1.8m workers from the EU and £2m workers from the "rest of the world". If we are to grow and become richer where do we get the extra employees from? Happy to answer your question. Good to see debate on here is a lot better than was had between "respected politicians" before the vote. (What a great example of an oxymoron). I think if we just look at the Australian model - you know the previously "racist" one - where they look at a points system for who they let in. We should now apply that here - obviously we treat EU and non-EU just the same. We need SOME immigration. That's why it is great that the NHS have a number non-British doctors and nurses. We need ever more doctors and nurses to treat the ever expanding population (additional 330,00 last year). So we need to reduce that 330,00 number. A lot. We are not growing at the rate that the population is! What has average GDP growth been over the last 10 years - I'll tell you - less than 0.5%. We are not a massive growth economy - but we are a better prospect for immigrants. Our NHS can't cope. Our Schools cannot cope. Out Housing Infrastructure cannot cope. Up until the last 5 years or so I believe that net immigration has had a positive effect on the economy. It is my belief that we have now gone passed the tipping point. People who are pro-EU / pro immigration don't think that. That is where the fundamental difference lies in the IN / OUT debate. The Referendum has always been about immigration. Large swathes of the country see immigration as the single biggest problem we have. ie the Labour heartlands and largely everyone in England who doesn't actually live in London. Cameron screwed himself. Said he hadn't made up his mind until he had re-negotiated our EU position. The EU said "p*ss off". Cameron then claimed victory and that he was voting for Remain. Dead in the water right there. He also maintained that he could keep net immigration down to tens of thousands. That was a LIE. Dead in the water. As for our previous leader Blair. Signed up to open door EU immigration that has led to the the huge increase in EU immigration. He started wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya that have de-stabilised the Middle East and led to - yup you guessed it - a huge increase in non-EU immigration crisis. Thanks Tony. Happy to carry on the debate. Changing the subject ever so slightly. A few weeks back a radio show played a 5 minute clip of a debate between Roy Jenkins and Tony Benn from 40 years ago before the last referendum. My god what a difference to the sniping, negative bilge we have put up with recently. Both of them argued their case (even agreeing with each other on some points), in a calm rational, reasonable manner. I fear the rise of the media savvy, career politician, put paid to sensible debate some time ago.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2016 9:54:21 GMT
I see the debate has fallen on to immigration as the key issue. I do smile when Brexiteers promote Controlled Immigration over free movement. Controlled by whom? Oh the government. Great so now we have politically motivated people making decisions on the recruitment needs of private companies. Wasn't red tape supposed to be an issue? As Tanksfull indicated it is demand that fuels economic migration, putting a layer of pen pushing won't change that. Possibly for you but not for me, for myself it was always about the economy & trading with those parts of the world that exactly exist outside the EU. But it would seem that you & Tanksful believe the EU will cut off it's own nose to spite it's face. But no-one in the Remain camp has explained why it would be a positive move by the EU to start a trade war, ultimately I don't think they will, but if they do it will just prove that the Leave camp were correct in pointing out that the EU is very insular & not really interested or focused on trade with countries outside the EU. As to the immigration point I'm quite happy with people coming here to work (& indeed most of then work exceedingly hard) but successive governments have used that immigration as cheap labour so that they don't have to deal with real issues like making the unemployed (what is the official rate now 1.6m?) here actually work & paying them to not work. If there are so many jobs being taken by immigrants why would any sane person pay people not to work? Then you get to the control issue, yes controlled by the government (are you aware of anywhere else in the world that supports uncontrolled immigration?), both in terms of the skills required by the economy (I mean was or economy & way of life in danger of collapsing because there were not enough car washers?) but also the quality of people unfortunately we breed enough murderers (as shown with the despicable murder of the MP) & rapists to not need to import them. But perhaps murderers & rapists is the collateral damage that people like yourself believe is a price worth paying for freedom of movement? Well, we've just cut off our nose to spite our face, so why not them? It would be less of an issue for them: the EU collectively is a much bigger market for us than the UK is for any individual EU state. As for them starting a trade war, if we're going to compete against rather than with them, who's doing that? It's odd to pick a fight and get indignant at the thought that others won't protect their interest at least to the point of neutralising the effect.
|
|