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
-
TrickyTree83 wrote: »And yet on another thread you seem to think I want to deny democracy to Scotland? Despite me saying nothing to imply that.
Does the same not apply for your posts?
I thought that you were arguing against having a new referendum in Scotland. If I misinterpreted that, apologies.0 -
in what way does free movement of white christian people in europe
Personally, I'd prefer not to prevent/allow free movement based on colour or religion. I know a lot of people do want to do this, but not myself. Sorry about that.I am not a financial adviser and neither do I play one on television. I might occasionally give bad advice but at least it's free.
Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them.0 -
gadgetmind wrote: »Personally, I'd prefer not to prevent/allow free movement based on colour or religion. I know a lot of people do want to do this, but not myself. Sorry about that.
no idea what you mean :0 -
gadgetmind wrote: »Personally, I'd prefer not to prevent/allow free movement based on colour or religion. I know a lot of people do want to do this, but not myself. Sorry about that.
It's a difficult problem to solve.
In the current climate the first duty of government - to protect the people they represent - is at odds with the free movement of people from countries which either don't have a handle on the extremist elements of their society (we would have been the same had the IRA been attacking the continent with regularity) or with countries whose society isn't closely aligned with that of Europeans. Freedom of expression, religion, etc...
It's such a problem now that I feel safer going to visit my in-laws in Ukraine (southern Ukraine to be precise) than I do if I went to Tunisia or Egypt like I did in the past 5 years. In Ukraine there is a civil war, in Tunisia and Egypt there's no civil war.
From an EU perspective, free movement of people is not as simple as having the idea and putting it into motion, especially if people may die as a result of it. Is the ideal worth even 1 human life? Would you be willing to make that call? I think reasonable border controls and background checks might make life a little less easy for some of us in the EU, but will reduce the risk to all of us. The lifting of visa restrictions should probably be as far as any country should go with regards to freedom of movement, the right to reside should be one that you apply for with sufficient background checks.0 -
no-one thinks the free movement of peoples (except between white christian European countries ) is realistic.
Problem with that theory is that there are other free movement/free trade blocks out there already or in the process of being set-up.
The GCC for one, which is the countries of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman and gives all citizens the right to live and work in each others countries - along with a fixed currency peg to the dollar as a precursor of a future single currency - and free trade between member states. It's most definitely not White, Christian or European.
The Agreement between New Zealand and Australia also allows free movement of labour and essentially free trade, and they're not in Europe.
The African Union is launching it's e-passport scheme this year with a goal of visa-free travel between all 54 African Union countries by 2020 and a free trade agreement is being negotiated in parallel.
The 10 ASEAN countries in SE Asia have concluded a new Single Market deal and their Economic Community is in the process of being implemented now - with a transitional free movement of Skilled Labour starting this year supplementing existing bilateral deals on movement of unskilled labour and a stated intent to move towards further integration with a single currency, full free movement, etc planned for later stages.
Like it or not - the world is increasingly moving towards regional blocks of single markets/unions/communities with free movement within those blocks - And Britain moving away from this model is a wholly regressive step that will decrease our competitiveness in the long term.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
TrickyTree83 wrote: »It's a difficult problem to solve.
.
No it's not.
We don't discriminate against people because of skin colour or religion - we don't engage in collective punishment of people because of their skin colour or religion - and we don't racially/religiously profile people for interaction with Police/Immigration - end of story.
It's illegal and it's illegal for good reason - because apart from being wholly wrong and causing further resentment and radicalisation - it also simply doesn't work.
The moment we divert more resources to checking one group of people our enemies will simply recruit more people from another group that isn't being checked as thoroughly because less resources are now available to check it.
Like Richard Reid, the UK born shoe bomber of white British and Jamaican mixed descent that no increased checks on people of Syrian origin would ever have flagged up.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »No it's not.
We don't discriminate against people because of skin colour or religion - we don't engage in collective punishment of people because of their skin colour or religion - and we don't racially/religiously profile people for interaction with Police/Immigration - end of story.
It's illegal and it's illegal for good reason - because apart from being wholly wrong it also simply doesn't work.
The moment we divert more resources to checking one group of people our enemies will simply recruit more people from another group that isn't being checked as thoroughly because less resources are now available to check it.
Like Richard Reid, the UK born shoe bomber of white British and Jamaican mixed descent.
That is incredibly naive.
It needs to be built up slowly and with caution.
I'm ok with freedom of movement how the UK was doing it. No to Schengen and retaining border checks. That's sensible. The ultra alternative which appears to be what you're advocating allows bad people to do bad things easily.
Should probably add, I don't believe I was advocating discrimination based on skin colour or religion if that is what you were suggesting. But background checks, who you're affiliated with, your history criminal or otherwise (hate preacher?), etc... the ultra alternative of absolute free movement would see people like Abu Hamza and Abu Qatada allowed to go about their business with impunity across any country they wish.
You can see the problem I would think.0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Problem with that theory is that there are other free movement/free trade blocks out there already or in the process of being set-up.
The GCC for one, which is the countries of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, and Oman and gives all citizens the right to live and work in each others countries - along with a fixed currency peg to the dollar as a precursor of a future single currency - and free trade between member states. It's most definitely not White, Christian or European.
The Agreement between New Zealand and Australia also allows free movement of labour and essentially free trade, and they're not in Europe.
The African Union is launching it's e-passport scheme this year with a goal of visa-free travel between all 54 African Union countries by 2020 and a free trade agreement is being negotiated in parallel.
The 10 ASEAN countries in SE Asia have concluded a new Single Market deal and their Economic Community is in the process of being implemented now - with a transitional free movement of Skilled Labour starting this year supplementing existing bilateral deals on movement of unskilled labour and a stated intent to move towards further integration with a single currency, full free movement, etc planned for later stages.
Like it or not - the world is increasingly moving towards regional blocks of single markets/unions/communities with free movement within those blocks - And Britain moving away from this model is a wholly regressive step that will decrease our competitiveness in the long term.
It will interesting to see how things work out.
Interesting that they all interested in deals between similar cultures and not based on geography only.
None of these are currently free movement of people at the moment (as far as I can see).
Clearly the GCC is simply an extension of the preparation for war.
I see a better future in free trade deals rather than overpopulating our own country for no gain to its people.0 -
UK To Open Three US Offices To Boost TradeThe UK Government is to open three new offices across the US to promote British business and develop economic ties following the vote to leave the EU.
The Department for International Trade said the cities of Minneapolis, Raleigh and San Diego have been chosen because of their economic productivity and established research and development centres.
Each office will be staffed by one person, recruited locally in the US, to work to promote UK business, economic and political ties.
International Trade Secretary Liam Fox said: "Our ambitious vision for an open and outward-looking UK economy includes growing our footprint in the most important markets around the world and these three cities offer exciting opportunities to boost trade and investment."
He made the announcement during a three-day visit to the US.
Similar offices are already located in Denver and Seattle.
The Government said the Seattle office alone had supported £8m in capital investment and 1,000 UK jobs over the past year.
http://www.964eagle.co.uk/news/business-news/2050584/uk-to-open-three-us-offices-to-boost-trade/0 -
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/07/jean-claude-juncker-comes-fighting-brexit/Jean-Claude Juncker comes out fighting over BrexitVerhofstadt: “Parliament will block a new favourable status for UK”Reacting to news coverage that British prime minister Theresa May is on her way to negotiating UK access to the single market with an additional rebate and a 7 to 10 year emergency break on EU-migration, Guy Verhofstadt, leader of the Liberals and Democrats in the European Parliament said:
“A deal with these conditions would be unthinkable. It would allow the UK to expand its already very favourable position: keeping the best parts and ridding itself of the obligations that come with it. EU Governments would be mad to agree to such a deal and I can tell you: the European Parliament will never agree to a deal that ‘de facto’ ends the free movement of people for a decade,while giving away an extra rebate in exchange for all the advantages of the internal market.The only new relationship between Britain and the European Union can be one in which the UK has an associated status with less obligations but equally less rights. And if this is not feasible, the fall back position will be an ordinary trade agreement between Britain and the EU.”
https://www.neweurope.eu/article/verhofstadt-parliament-will-block-new-favourable-status-uk/0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards