We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
If we vote for Brexit what happens
Comments
-
Well, I'm one ahead now that everyone accepts that free movement of people at the present time is impractical.
Just need to move on
to the benefits of democratic accountability
to benefits of free trade in goods and services with the whole world
to benefits of reducing regulations
to the benefits of getting rid of the euro
to the benefits of the EU addressing the unemployment problems in the EU
to the benefits of the UK addressing its balance of trade issue
to the problems of housing
to the benefits of controlling immigration
but all this is irrelevant because you all know the EU is a solution to all these issues and not the (partial) cause
Impractical but I am not convinced it cannot be capable of a collective solution .Why would trying to climb on lorries or get passage on boats stop? Would they all just say, that's Britain 20 miles away, they are not EU and they shoot asylum seekers and other migrants?
I agree something needs to be done. Maybe we allocate emigrants to countries on a fair basis and issue a temporary national passport to people that excludes them from FoM unless they have demonstrated they can live, work, and learn the language. Maybe we divide the EU into Zones where FoM works based on regional prosperity.
Maybe after the world has sorted the problems in Syria and helped build a better society in the region we can repatriate those who have come from there.
We need more imaginative solutions.
WE trade with the whole world already -55% go there (many through EU trade agreements we have already paid towards)
What regulations would go specifically? How would their removal help our trade with EU? Would we use different standards in producing 50 odd new agreements? How much will that cost? In 1970 (when we traded with the word there were loads of standards we had to follow on export and we imposed the same deal on imports)?
What has the Euro got to do with the UK?
If there was no mutual support to the poorer nations it would encourage regional instability
UK addresses its BoP issues by exporting more or importing less. Germany manages to Trade with China using an EU Trade Agreement but sells 3 times as much as we do. So we can do that.
Housing? Have you considered building more houses? No where do be get those builders from? Expelling immigrant builders will help?In the european parliament, the nationals of 27 other european countries get to vote on UK laws.
As we do on theirs. My southern MP gets to vote on the Northern Powerhouse or to Build Warships in Scotland. Is that wrong? But our MPs can decide whether it becomes UK Law..
Democracy means that we the people of the UK can make our own laws via our parliament and kick the government out occasionally.
I have no wish to improve the functioning of the EU parliament or indeed its governance:
I wish to trade with the EU just as I wish to trade with the rest of the world without being part of their law making process. Plenty of further scope for co-operation on many other fronts without the EU determining our laws.
You may see democracy simply as a slogan, others see it worth dying for.
In other words you do not want to remain and no amount of talking will convince you. Can I ask, since we joined the EEC, have you ever voted for a party that has done this?Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
I don't think discussing immigration is invalid, far from it. There are lots of economic and social concerns that it's great to discuss.
The fact is that there are a huge number of other things that do and don't happen as a result of the UK being in the EU. It's a bit depressing that it all seems to boil down to whether we need pot washers or brain surgeons or neither to migrate to the UK
How many Claptons does the UK have?
How many Claptons does the UK need?
How likely are we to be able to reduce our number of Claptons if British citizens no longer have free movement to other countries?
Ergo, immigration is a good thing.
And emigration, preferably, of Claptons.0 -
I agree something needs to be done. Maybe we allocate emigrants to countries on a fair basis and issue a temporary national passport to people that excludes them from FoM unless they have demonstrated they can live, work, and learn the language. Maybe we divide the EU into Zones where FoM works based on regional prosperity.
Germany wants immigration (as in Merkel). As it has a rapidly ageing population. Arguably this is a selfish attitude. Forcing a view onto other member states. Who don't face the same problem and have no need of a growing population.0 -
I think we are in a serious danger of voting to leave because of apathy from the remain camp.Proudly voted remain. A global union of countries is the only way to commit global capital to the rule of law.0
-
Impractical but I am not convinced it cannot be capable of a collective solution .Why would trying to climb on lorries or get passage on boats stop? Would they all just say, that's Britain 20 miles away, they are not EU and they shoot asylum seekers and other migrants?
I agree something needs to be done. Maybe we allocate emigrants to countries on a fair basis and issue a temporary national passport to people that excludes them from FoM unless they have demonstrated they can live, work, and learn the language. Maybe we divide the EU into Zones where FoM works based on regional prosperity.
Maybe after the world has sorted the problems in Syria and helped build a better society in the region we can repatriate those who have come from there.
We need more imaginative solutions.
WE trade with the whole world already -55% go there (many through EU trade agreements we have already paid towards)
What regulations would go specifically? How would their removal help our trade with EU? Would we use different standards in producing 50 odd new agreements? How much will that cost? In 1970 (when we traded with the word there were loads of standards we had to follow on export and we imposed the same deal on imports)?
What has the Euro got to do with the UK?
If there was no mutual support to the poorer nations it would encourage regional instability
UK addresses its BoP issues by exporting more or importing less. Germany manages to Trade with China using an EU Trade Agreement but sells 3 times as much as we do. So we can do that.
Housing? Have you considered building more houses? No where do be get those builders from? Expelling immigrant builders will help?
As we do on theirs. My southern MP gets to vote on the Northern Powerhouse or to Build Warships in Scotland. Is that wrong? But our MPs can decide whether it becomes UK Law.
In other words you do not want to remain and no amount of talking will convince you. Can I ask, since we joined the EEC, have you ever voted for a party that has done this?
in summary
-I wish to be able to vote for an MP who sits in the UK parliament and makes our laws.
-I am a pragmatist so reductio ad absurdum does not appeal to me
-I don't believe that larger population provide a better quality of life for the natives
-freedom of movement within a country seems reasonable to me
-free trade in goods and services with the whole world seems reasonable
-free to subsidise or not our own agriculture and fisheries and industries is OK with me
if I have to decide for myself whether I buy a bendy banana or an apple that isn't 75% red then I'm willing to pay that price.0 -
ruggedtoast wrote: »How many Claptons does the UK have?
How many Claptons does the UK need?
How likely are we to be able to reduce our number of Claptons if British citizens no longer have free movement to other countries?
Ergo, immigration is a good thing.
And emigration, preferably, of Claptons.
although there are quite a lot of claptons but there are still too few.
I doubt you would fit it, but I'm a flexible pragmatist so there is still hope for you.0 -
I don't think discussing immigration is invalid, far from it. There are lots of economic and social concerns that it's great to discuss.
The fact is that there are a huge number of other things that do and don't happen as a result of the UK being in the EU. It's a bit depressing that it all seems to boil down to whether we need pot washers or brain surgeons or neither to migrate to the UK
I agree discussing it is valid.
I do have a problem when someone focusses on immigration and assumes there are no genuine asylum seekers or use slightly disparaging remarks about other ethnic groups {as sometimes a minority do).Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
Thrugelmir wrote: »Germany wants immigration (as in Merkel). As it has a rapidly ageing population. Arguably this is a selfish attitude. Forcing a view onto other member states. Who don't face the same problem and have no need of a growing population.
Do we and lots of others not have the same problem?Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.0 -
Do we and lots of others not have the same problem?
no we don't need more people
if fact we have a large backlog of infrastructure needed just to meet the demands of the current population
the clue is that if we had a labour shortage then wages would rise as employer competed for those available.
no sign of that to any significant degree.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards