London

Generali

padington wrote: »

Since when was China or India new ?

Since I didn't read your post properly.

zagubov wrote: »

Since 1949 and 1950 respectively.

It seems that I didn't need to read the post properly after all.:D

CLAPTON

padington wrote: »

Where else in the world has created such a large new zone of free movement of people, goods trades and services ?

do you favour a 100% free movement of people?

antrobus

zagubov wrote: »

Since 1949 and 1950 respectively.

I'd put it later. About 1991/2 for India, and about 1978/79 for China.

Which is when those nations decided to drop their respective versions of the state capitalist model and joined the world market.

antrobus

CLAPTON wrote: »

do you favour a 100% free movement of people?

Do you object to the 100% free movement of people that has existed between London and Loughborough since time immemorial?

mrginge

antrobus wrote: »

Do you object to the 100% free movement of people that has existed between London and Loughborough since time immemorial?

Are you suggesting that because a person can move freely between London and loghborough, then all international borders should be removed?

CLAPTON

antrobus wrote: »

Do you object to the 100% free movement of people that has existed between London and Loughborough since time immemorial?

Your knowledge of UK history is appalling.

I do not support the free movement of all the people of the world :
do you?

michaels

Interestingly in China which is a single country I beleive they still apply restrictions on internal movement of people through residency controls to prevent destabilising levels of migration where the infrastructure couldn't cope.....

antrobus

mrginge wrote: »

Are you suggesting that because a person can move freely between London and loghborough, then all international borders should be removed?

I'm suggesting that someone who objects to 100% free movement of people needs to construct an argument as to why people from Loughborough and Lahore should be treated differently.

CLAPTON wrote: »

Your knowledge of UK history is appalling....

In what sense? Has there not been 100% free movement of people between London and Loughborough since time immemorial?

CLAPTON wrote: »

...I do not support the free movement of all the people of the world :
do you?

Clearly not. But why do you object to free trade in one context but not another?

antrobus

michaels wrote: »

Interestingly in China which is a single country I beleive they still apply restrictions on internal movement of people through residency controls to prevent destabilising levels of migration where the infrastructure couldn't cope.....

They appear to have something called the Hukou System, which is an attempt to control the movement of people. There are however, also tens (if not hundreds) of millions of migrants operating outside that system, so it does not appear to be 100% successful.

It has it's own Wikipedia page.:)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hukou_system

CLAPTON

antrobus wrote: »

I'm suggesting that someone who objects to 100% free movement of people needs to construct an argument as to why people from Loughborough and Lahore should be treated differently.



In what sense? Has there not been 100% free movement of people between London and Loughborough since time immemorial?



Clearly not. But why do you object to free trade in one context but not another?

Do you really not know that once England was a slave society where the majority were not free to move between London and Loughborough?


Good to know that we both agree that the free movement of people should be restricted.

I support free trade between countries : one of the many reason I object to the EU with its long history of tariff walls against the majority of world's countries but in particular I object to the barriers set against the poor developing countries.