If we vote for Brexit what happens

wotsthat

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

We are full.
We have all the workers we need, as evidenced by both employment statistics and vacancy statistics.
We do not need any more.

Shouty hyperbole.

We currently do have FoM so in the context of 'what happens next' we could discuss what the effect of transitioning from FoM to 'not FoM' might look like. Pointing out other countries don't have FoM isn't that enlightening.

Nothing is completely positive but the consumer (who vote with their pockets) has decided that the positives outweigh the negatives. That's as plain as day even though they might say something different.


As far as my Italian server is concerned and your assertion that she'll be allowed to stay and therefore we won't need another Italian server and our willing unemployed won't need to be mobilised doesn't consider the real world.

She won't be staying because she doesn't want to spend her life serving coffee to the likes of me. There will be a vacancy (Pret for example are permanently recruiting and only 1 in 50 applicants are Brits). If we stop letting in unskilled labour then the only option is for a Brit to step in. Unfortunately they don't seem keen.

It's only a thought experiment. What I think happens is that Pret would be shafted and the jobs disappear, the migrants go home and don't leave a job behind for a Brit to fill.

As you say foreigners are consumers too so GDP will fall as they disappear and there's a dawning realisation the unemployed aren't a willing and able resource. Despite many posters currently frantically making a big deal of rounding errors when comparing UK to EU GDP they'll be pouring scorn on others for worshiping the 'great god GDP'.

wotsthat

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Seems as if the EU is already setting the tone. Anyone for Soft Brexit?

You've pointed out many times the EU is composed of members with diverse aims that find agreement close to impossible. Seems odd to assume they've agreed on a hard Brexit at this early stage.

Mrs May with her enlarged majority will sort 'em and, as the dear departed Conrad would say, we're getting a sweet deal and if we don't we didn't need one anyway.

Thrugelmir

wotsthat wrote: »

You've pointed out many times the EU is composed of members with diverse aims that find agreement close to impossible.

Seems as if politics by the elite is taking centre stage. Judging by the leaked memo. Rather than mutual agreement of the member states. Is the veneer peeling away?

wotsthat

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Seems as if politics by the elite is taking centre stage. Judging by the leaked memo. Rather than mutual agreement of the member states. Is the veneer peeling away?

Make your mind up whether the EU is a collection of disparate nations that can't agree or one ruled by Germany. You swing between the two options depending on which anti EU point you're making.

BobQ

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Restrict movement to skilled workers only, with jobs to go to. If a party commits to FOM they can guarantee they will not get my vote, it might work on the continent but here we can't deal with it. We have a massive number of Polish people here in my locality, very few of them in skilled work, and very few of them speak English.

If people come to this country we need to be able to ensure they have SKILLED work, ensure they have enough money to fall back on if they "lose" that job, that they have a home to go to and will not expect social housing, and that they actually speak English. We also need to demand that they have a medical before they arrive, one from a list of doctors that can be trusted, and perhaps controversially, we need to tell them that they will not get free medical treatment for anything other than accidental injuries for the first year - that would stop the people that move here because they need ongoing medical treatment.

I now await attacks from the people that think we should open our doors to everyone and had over a free pass to the nhs as soon as people come in.

I voted Remain, but I confess that of all the issues in play, FoM was one I felt uncomfortable with. It may be that we cannot negotiate with the EU on the topic and have a binary choice. But I think we should explore the matter as clearly the EU will not want to upset the trading relationship we have if there is some scope to negotiate.

I agree with some of what you suggest although I think it is too rigid. I do not think it makes sense to restrict movement based on skills.

I would have no problem if those moving in either direction had to have a employment and/or sufficient funds to support themselves and their families when they are not employed. I agree that speaking English to some standard should be a requirement to come to the UK. Access to education and healthcare is an issue but provided those who come here contribute to taxation and so to the services they use I am not so bothered.

However, I also recognise that there are many in this country who see any immigration as unacceptable, others who are prejudiced against or fear certain types of immigrant and those who simply blame immigration for poor public services and taking our jobs. Some combination of these reasons was probably the clinching argument in the referendum.

Objectively, I think we need some immigration and I would like to see some kind of FoM/Trade compromise negotiated. Clearly some see that as a sell out of Brexit, but until we enhance the numbers of trained nurses, doctors and plumbers and persuade some UK workers to do the jobs that immigrants do not see as beneath them, we need some immigration.

kabayiri

wotsthat wrote: »

Make your mind up whether the EU is a collection of disparate nations that can't agree or one ruled by Germany. You swing between the two options depending on which anti EU point you're making.

I suspect one of the main challenges the EU will have is to maintain unity between the 27 EU states during the negotiations.

It seems inevitable that there will be winners and losers.

Nigel Farage announced on LBC tonight that he plans to go on an European road tour explaining to the good people of France and Belgium etc are going to have their jobs put at risk by the EU political elite.

The guys got chutzpah, I'll give him that ! It'd be easier to be a lead balloon salesman.

Thrugelmir

wotsthat wrote: »

Make your mind up whether the EU is a collection of disparate nations that can't agree or one ruled by Germany. You swing between the two options depending on which anti EU point you're making.

The European Commission is a third option.

kabayiri

BobQ wrote: »

...
Objectively, I think we need some immigration and I would like to see some kind of FoM/Trade compromise negotiated. Clearly some see that as a sell out of Brexit, but until we enhance the numbers of trained nurses, doctors and plumbers and persuade some UK workers to do the jobs that immigrants do not see as beneath them, we need some immigration.

When recent government policy from both sides has been to push more and more of our young down the higher education route, it should not be surprising that they set their sights on higher quality jobs.

You're not going to pay 60 grand of student debt off by working in a coffee shop.

davomcdave

kabayiri wrote: »

You're not going to pay 60 grand of student debt off by working in a coffee shop.

Nor repay yourself for 3-5 years of income forgone.

At some point people will realise that immigration and the EU have been falsely conflated. Look at immigration numbers for Canada, NZ and Australia for example:

- Canada: 2016 net migration was +342,000 or a little under 1% of Canada's population
- Australia: 2016 net migration was 193,000 or 0.8%
- NZ: 2016 net migration 70,000 or 1.6%
- UK: 2016 net migration was 273,000 or less than 0.5%

It would appear that the EU isn't causing your 'problem' with immigration. The things that Australia, NZ, the UK and Canada share is that they are prosperous economies that speak English. Maybe people just like having the Queen as Head of State.

People seek to migrate to successful countries to do the jobs that locals can't or won't do. Australia has recently announced that it is going to end its current migrant worker visa to replace it with an even more stupid scheme. Who picks the fruit in Australia?

1. Backpackers who get a tax break plus extra time on their visas for working on farms.
2, Poor people from Asia who come in for a few months at a time to earn more than they can in their home country.

It sure as hell isn't Australians. They're not going to stand in the baking sun for hours picking strawberries when they can work far less and earn far more indoors.

cogito

What you're missing there is that Australia and Canada are vast countries with small populations whereas the UK is a small country with a population greater than Australia and Canada combined and a much higher population density. You didn't pick the best examples there.