If we vote for Brexit what happens

TrickyTree83

Rinoa wrote: »

I like the way you put forward political commentators views on twitter as evidence of fact. :rotfl:

You should see the gems coming out on the Scotland thread.

The ability to consume evidence and change ones own opinion appears to have perished amongst some.

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

I didn't say they didn't, I said that they almost exclusively stay in dorms or HMO's, like all of the other students, so their impact on housing is minimal.

I know of no students that live in dorms.
A great number of young people in London live in HMO and so directly compete with students.
Purpose built student accommodate directly reduces the amount of housing available for the native population
Many foreign students (especially non EU) live in very nice flats.

Correct. But what you're willfully missing, is that with more people, the cost per-person of that funding is less.

without the increase in population, in many situations, the cost per person would be ZERO as there would be no need for the extra infrastructure

I figured that. Because you blame everything on foreigners instead of incompetent and corrupt politicians.

if you have evidence of massive corrupt best report it to the police.
Incompetence I agree with you: they should never have opened the flood gates to immigration on the scale they did.

Take Japan for instance, huge population density, had a major street destroyed due to a sink hole. Had it completely repaired in 2 days; filled, surfaced, painted. In the UK, with councils that are criminally under-funded, they would barely have the cones down within 2 days, and the road would be closed for at least 6 months.

probably due to the absense of EU H&S rules and regulation

I don't, I'm refuting your claims that reducing populations will make anything better, when the problem is not the population.

you have given no clear reasons why increasing population makes us per person better off.

wotsthat

Hopefully we will stop foreign tourists coming here.

They demand purpose built accommodation (hotels) which could be used by the native born instead. They take water from our taps, use roads and airports and generally use infrastructure without a by your leave.

Bloody foreigners.

CLAPTON

wotsthat wrote: »

Hopefully we will stop foreign tourists coming here.

They demand purpose built accommodation (hotels) which could be used by the native born instead. They take water from our taps, use roads and airports and generally use infrastructure without a by your leave.

Bloody foreigners.

or alternatively, we could be sensible and arrive at a sensible balance based on broadly, what is in the best interests of the people of this country without preconditions about a unlimited immigration from white, christian european countries.

bloody non-EU foreigners perhaps

Conrad

In relation to the IMPRESSION given by the Govt and opposition with regards the central claim ‘THIS IS YOUR DECISION’;

Advertising Standards Agency Rules;

‘The ASA will take into account the impression created by marketing communications as well as specific claims. It will rule on the basis of the likely effect on consumers, not the marketer's intentions’.


Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.


3.3Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.




https://www.cap.org.uk/Advertising-Codes/Non-Broadcast/CodeItem.aspx?cscid={61a03caa-6750-498d-8732-68d55c0752fd}#.WCx-KMt745s

mayonnaise

Conrad wrote: »

POST TRUTH-AGE
Treasury, May 2016;
“There is a clear central conclusion, a VOTE to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to the economy, that shock would push the economy into recession, and add 500,000 to the unemployed number"

And now for a fact check in this post-truth era:

May 23 - Britain would lose at least half a million jobs within two years of a vote to leave the European Union and a fall in the value of the pound would push up inflation sharply, Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne said on Monday.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-osborne-idUKKCN0YE141

prosaver

mayonnaise wrote: »

And now for a fact check in this post-truth era:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-osborne-idUKKCN0YE141

You got more twist and turns, than timmy the twisting worm who live in twistville. When are you ever going to say ur wrong?

A_Medium_Size_Jock

mayonnaise wrote: »

And now for a fact check in this post-truth era:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-osborne-idUKKCN0YE141

That link & quote is from May you know.
Six months ago; very old news now, even from you.
But remind us again what else Mr Osborne forecast?
Like ....... an emergency budget; "immediate and profound..." yada yada yada.
And where he is now?

mayonnaise

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

That link & quote is from May you know.
Six months ago; very old news now, even from you.

Yes, it's from May.
It was the quote Conrad referred to.
Please keep up.

Conrad wrote: »

POST TRUTH-AGE
Treasury, May 2016;
“There is a clear central conclusion, a VOTE to leave would represent an immediate and profound shock to the economy, that shock would push the economy into recession, and add 500,000 to the unemployed number"

A_Medium_Size_Jock

mayonnaise wrote: »

Yes, it's from May.
It was the quote Conrad referred to.
Please keep up.

Keep up?
Ha ha ha ........ when you don't even realise that the whole point of the link was that none of the included "immediate" threats have so far happened?
I guess it went straight over your head, eh?