If we vote for Brexit what happens

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

this is a discussion forum
if you wish to praise an IRA supporter then its fair comment to reply
if you wish to rubbish British institutions then its fair comment to reply
if you wish to use racist terms like 'little englander' and incorrectly at that, then its fair comment to reply

I will post as I see fit : you are free to ignore then if you wish

You are not replying .....you are trolling. The matter has been discussed and the discussion has ended. You continually repeat your twisted straw man lies on threads which are discussing other matters.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

You are not replying .....you are trolling. The matter has been discussed and the discussion has ended. You continually repeat your twisted straw man lies on threads which are discussing other matters.

the support of Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott/Livingstone for the IRA is a matter of public record
The refusal of Corbybn to discuss the matter shows him to a devious person with no principles and no courage of his convictions (also show by his about face on most of his 30 year held policies.
Your total inability to find a single inappropriate post from me, is laughable and so it you fantasy view of what you image i 'really ' think.
But no matter, sadly recent history is full of socialist double speak, refusal to acknowledge the evil of their heroes, 'just doing my duty' mindset and just refusing to face the publicly known facts.
A true fellow traveller.

Moby

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Does it not worry you that if 500m people have an EU passport and Eurozone unemployment doesn't improve that when the £10 p/h living wage comes into force in the UK that our population and it's density (something no one here has referred to yet) will rise much further and much faster than it has previously?

I understand that my comment is speculative, it's how I feel when I put myself in the shoes of an Italian, Greek, Spanish, Portuguese young person who is unable to find work in their home country. I can speak a bit of English from my schooling days and the minimum wage in the UK is much higher than it is in my home country. If I had the opportunity to move I would go.

Now should that come to pass with the free movement of people it seems to me that it's not an unreasonable leap to see a situation with even higher pressure on all services. Even more so if families make the move and only one member of the family is earning that minimum wage, and if you can't feed or house your family you're more likely to take the decision to move in order to be able to do so.

Tricky......a reasonable man to talk to! Point taken but:-
1. The free movement of people is not set in stone....It can be adapted. The people in countries like the UK will see to it. Leaving...takes us away from where the centre of decision making is. It makes us look bad.
2. More than half of our immigration comes from outside the EU. Why haven't we dealt with this part?
3. We leave the EU.......what then happens with our border controls agreements. Whether these are intergovernmental or not....a country like France will not allow things to stay the same as they are now. They will open the border at Calais!
4. Brexiteers use immigration to give a scapegoat to the problems people face in their lives to gain their support. Throughout history immigration has been used in the same way time after time.
5. Don't forget under the free movement of peoples 1 million people from the UK have chosen to move to Spain. That is good....retirees go there for the sun and we get people from Eastern Europe who want to work!
6. Also think of this as a long term gain issue. Part of our fee for being in the EU is invested in the poorer parts. The aim is to bring these countries up to Western European standards, ....economies, lifestyle etc. That is a good thing . It helps them and it means that they will no longer be regarded as a poor neighbour who wants what I have. It brings stability to Europe in unstable times and furthers the peace project which is now 60 years old.
The government of the time chooses how much to spend on public services. The government of the time decides housing policy. There are no EU directives stopping us from building houses.....we built houses after the 2nd world war in much more economically unfavourable conditions. Where there is a will ...!

Mistermeaner

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Does it not worry you that if 500m people have an EU passport and Eurozone unemployment doesn't improve that when the £10 p/h living wage comes into force in the UK that our population and it's density (something no one here has referred to yet) will rise much further and much faster than it has previously?

I understand that my comment is speculative, it's how I feel when I put myself in the shoes of an Italian, Greek, Spanish, Portuguese young person who is unable to find work in their home country. I can speak a bit of English from my schooling days and the minimum wage in the UK is much higher than it is in my home country. If I had the opportunity to move I would go.

Now should that come to pass with the free movement of people it seems to me that it's not an unreasonable leap to see a situation with even higher pressure on all services. Even more so if families make the move and only one member of the family is earning that minimum wage, and if you can't feed or house your family you're more likely to take the decision to move in order to be able to do so.

Edit: If this is a real possibility, and it doesn't seem unreasonable to say that this is possible, according to some on here the UK government ought to be building/planning for these people to arrive. Because if we didn't then we'd be attempting to service more people with less resource per person. Right?

But isn't the reality at the moment that we cannot afford to build all these new schools and hospitals and recruiting the staff we need for them? That we shouldn't be living beyond our means and borrowing to the hilt to fund all of this expansion? So someone please explain how we're supposed to deal with an influx of people - which we're unable to control at the border - when we're unable to deal with and pay for what we have now?

Money comes from taxes paid in large part by people who are working here. We currently pay (just) for our large retired population because we have had growth in the numbers of working people

We are currently not breeding enough to fund the retirement of those currently working

We need either more people working, we all pay more in tax, or we spend less on retired people.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

the support of Corbyn/McDonnell/Abbott/Livingstone for the IRA is a matter of public record
The refusal of Corbybn to discuss the matter shows him to a devious person with no principles and no courage of his convictions (also show by his about face on most of his 30 year held policies.
Your total inability to find a single inappropriate post from me, is laughable and so it you fantasy view of what you image i 'really ' think.
But no matter, sadly recent history is full of socialist double speak, refusal to acknowledge the evil of their heroes, 'just doing my duty' mindset and just refusing to face the publicly known facts.
A true fellow traveller.

Clapton I have no intention of getting drawn in by your obsessive rants and hatreds. I don't think you are quite the full ticket mate....go away and troll elsewhere!

Moby

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

So the infamous letter of 364 was a minority in opposition to Margaret Thatchers decision to join the single market in 1981?

This decision is certainly not clear. It may be in your mind but it's not in almost half of the population if you go by all of the opinion polls to date. I accept there might be economic consequences to leaving, there's also a chance there won't be but that's not recognised by those for whom it doesn't fit the narrative.

Tricky....What letter was this?...excuse my ignorance. When I said the decision is clear....what I meant to say was that there is complete unanimity re. the advice from experts...... as against the decision re. the Euro and ERM for instance....those were far more contentious decisions at the time they were taken?

TrickyTree83

Moby wrote: »

Tricky......a reasonable man to talk to! Point taken but:-
1. The free movement of people is not set in stone....It can be adapted. The people in countries like the UK will see to it. Leaving...takes us away from where the centre of decision making is. It makes us look bad.
2. More than half of our immigration comes from outside the EU. Why haven't we dealt with this part?
3. We leave the EU.......what then happens with our border controls agreements. Whether these are intergovernmental or not....a country like France will not allow things to stay the same as they are now. They will open the border at Calais!
4. Brexiteers use immigration to give a scapegoat to the problems people face in their lives to gain their support. Throughout history immigration has been used in the same way time after time.
5. Don't forget under the free movement of peoples 1 million people from the UK have chosen to move to Spain. That is good....retirees go there for the sun and we get people from Eastern Europe who want to work!
6. Also think of this as a long term gain issue. Part of our fee for being in the EU is invested in the poorer parts. The aim is to bring these countries up to Western European standards, ....economies, lifestyle etc. That is a good thing . It helps them and it means that they will no longer be regarded as a poor neighbour who wants what I have. It brings stability to Europe in unstable times and furthers the peace project which is now 60 years old.
The government of the time chooses how much to spend on public services. The government of the time decides housing policy. There are no EU directives stopping us from building houses.....we built houses after the 2nd world war in much more economically unfavourable conditions. Where there is a will ...!

I'd love it if the EU came out and said we need to change free movement of people to free movement of labour. It's a much more sensible policy, but that's not what is on offer. It should have been but in my view Cameron failed in the negotiations.

The immigration from outside is almost as high as EU migration, that's a government failing. Now we might actually need the 300,000 net. My worry is that although we control non-EU migration, we could slap a cap on it tomorrow for example, we're unable to do that with migration from the EU. Deteriorating circumstances within the EU right now should be a concern for all, not just for immigration but economically too. If people don't earn Euro's they can't buy our exports. We should re-orientate to include the rest of the world in trade deals, something the EU fails to do because it's a protectionist customs union.

We wouldn't be in a vastly different scenario than we are now with migrants trying to hitch rides in trucks and come across on boats if we left the EU. The volume of attempts would likely increase.

I don't see immigration as a scapegoat or as a bad thing. It's the lack of control and uncertainty around immigration that I believe to be bad.

I would think that the retirees living in Southern Spain and France would continue to do so. If they were ejected by those governments it would surprise me as no one here is claiming we should eject EU citizens in the event of a Leave vote. And if they are then they are silly to do so. Immigration is a must for the country and for UK business, it's the lack of control which is the issue for me.

I agree that after WW2 we built houses like we should be doing now. Because someone obviously had a plan and people agreed with that plan. At the moment we have no plan, we also have no way of financing that plan which doesn't take us into more debt. We're still in a budget deficit so our pile of debt grows. We're unable to pay for what we have now so a massive expansion of infrastructure, buildings and staff for these services cannot be paid for without massive additional borrowing. So to relieve pressure on existing services and build what we need, we will need to mortgage the future of generations of people in this country don't we?

I've covered the impact of the EU on the poorer countries earlier in this thread. There is evidence that free movement of people, and hypothetically labour is a detriment to those economies as their best and brightest seek out greater riches in the UK, France, Germany, etc... this doesn't help those poorer countries. Helps us though.

TrickyTree83

Moby wrote: »

Tricky....What letter was this?...excuse my ignorance. When I said the decision is clear....what I meant to say was that there is complete unanimity re. the advice from experts...... as against the decision re. the Euro and ERM for instance....those were far more contentious decisions at the time they were taken?

This infamous letter was a declaration of unanimity against the choice to join the single market.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4803858.stm

Filo25

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

This infamous letter was a declaration of unanimity against the choice to join the single market.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4803858.stm

No it was a letter being strongly critical of the 1981 budget, further fiscal tightening in the midst of a period of below trend growth was hugely controversial

TrickyTree83

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Money comes from taxes paid in large part by people who are working here. We currently pay (just) for our large retired population because we have had growth in the numbers of working people

We are currently not breeding enough to fund the retirement of those currently working

We need either more people working, we all pay more in tax, or we spend less on retired people.

I'm not advocating for a ban on immigration. I'll admit others voting to leave might well be but that's not a sensible stance with regards to the economy in my view. There is a deficit in the birth rate of British people which is addressed by immigration. The uncontrolled nature of it is the issue.

There is no argument against the proposal that we do not control the numbers coming from the EU is there? No one can tell us we can control the numbers coming in from the EU and can show us how to do it can they? So I propose we accept this as a fact.

So if there happens to be a situation on the continent where we look like a really good place to come we're going to be increasing our population with no say for the people already living here (which includes migrants) or those born here.

I would also point out that our taxes are not enough to pay for what we've got right now. If they were we would not have a budget deficit and we wouldn't have gone through austerity. And that includes the taxation from EU migrants doesn't it?