Life in prosperous independant nations - awfull? 'Isolated' Irrelevant'?

Conrad

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Funny you should mention that....:o

"It's fair to say that maybe some point down the line there might be a UK-US trade agreement but that's not going to happen anytime soon because our focus is negotiating with a big bloc, the European Union, to get a trade agreement done."

"And the UK is going to be in the back of the queue, not because we don't have a special relationship but because given the heavy lift on any trade agreement, us having access to a big market with a lot of countries rather than trying to do piecemeal trade agreements is hugely efficient."

President Barack Obama - 22/04/16

So whilst the US still has no trade deal with the EU after 40 years, it has concluded many trade deals with independent nations to include a few recently


And Barrak is on his way out anyway so his opinion adds up to zilch
Try again

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

there doesn't seem much prospect of the EU - USA trade agreement either after how many years?

obviously you are totally ignorant about the UK's existing trade with the USA

.......whereas you are just generally ignorant. Grown up countries do not isolate themselves. Obamas intervention was devastating for Brexiteers. He clearly said much more than he needed to and it is also clear that there is not one world leader bearing good will to the UK who thinks it would be a good thing for us to Brexit.

antrobus

Conrad wrote: »

...And Barrak is on his way out anyway so his opinion adds up to zilch....

Obama is simply a mouthpiece for standard US foreign policy.

The official line in 1975 was;

'If Britain opts out of Europe, the U.S.-UK relationship could become lop-sided and a drain on the U.S. Adrift from Europe, a progressively enfeebled Britain would find it hard to avoid becoming internationally irrelevant. The U.S. could not gain from such an outcome'

Why would you expect it to be any different in 2016?

Johnsmith2016

Would of been much more informative if obama's speech hadnt been written by no.10.
Obamas opinion is all about TTIP and his own interests, as it should be.
Would he allow free movment of mexicans, or his laws made elsewere?
He leaves soon, and its looking like we get clinton or trump -'trump who thinks we will leave, so i would imagine he will deal with us. Clinton prob same stance as obama.

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

.......whereas you are just generally ignorant. Grown up countries do not isolate themselves. Obamas intervention was devastating for Brexiteers. He clearly said much more than he needed to and it is also clear that there is not one world leader bearing good will to the UK who thinks it would be a good thing for us to Brexit.

are you in favour of TTIP?

mayonnaise

And Farage's response is as classy as ever.

President Obama Has A Grudge Against Britain Because His Family Is From Kenya

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/president-obama-has-a-grudge-against-britain-because-his-family-is-from-kenya-says-nigel-farage_uk_571a2285e4b018a884dcc8c7
Why doesn't he just use the N-word?

borkid

cells wrote: »

They along with most of your first post examples have high population growth thanks to migrants.


Australia total fertility 1.9
NZ 2.05
Canada 1.6
Singapore 1.3
S-Korea 1.3

All of them are growing rapidly and not due to a baby boom. Australia especially the poster child of a 'correct migrant system' is growing at about twice the rate as the UK.

So if we wanted to copy an Australia. We would leave the EU but double out migrants coming into the UK and have a population growth of 1 million a year



If that is what you are proposing. Leave the EU but increase population growth to 1 million a year then yes I suspect we could emulate a successful high migration country like Australia


If on the other hand this is a vote for leaving the EU and pushing migration and population growth towards zero then you only have Japan to look at. A country where the GDPppp/Capita is lower than all your other examples and where the GDPppp/capita is about what it was 20 years ago

But it not just any immigration is it. We need to be able to choose the people we want in our country. If we remain in the EU then immigration would be anyone, whatever skills or not, from the EU would be allowed in plus in a couple of years anyone from any part of the world that Merkel has invited in. If we are out then we can chose the people we have, so skilled people who can support themselves and they could be from anywhere in the world including the EU.

mwpt

borkid wrote: »

But it not just any immigration is it. We need to be able to choose the people we want in our country. If we remain in the EU then immigration would be anyone, whatever skills or not, from the EU would be allowed in plus in a couple of years anyone from any part of the world that Merkel has invited in. If we are out then we can chose the people we have, so skilled people who can support themselves and they could be from anywhere in the world including the EU.

So only the correct sort of folk are allowed here. What would be the profile of these correct sort of folk? Surely you'd want EU citizens to remain, since they are net contributors to our tax system.

Johnsmith2016

Cells - i am voting out, and do not want or expect migration to go to zero. I am actually for migration as are UKIP funnily enough - the different with the aussie system is quality not just a number - the key though is that is on the terms that benefit the uk e.g us - its about quality not just simple quantity and saying we take x amount = x amount to the economy and thats it. Numbers alone cant quantify certain things, thats why it has to be done on a merit and needs basis.
And our ability to choose who comes and settles here. If we are lacking brain surgeons and indian has plenty applying we can allow them in, likewise a unskilled romanian builder with a criminal record we can refuse. Surely no one can say its wrong for a country to select the best it needs based on the pool available ? It happens this way in most other areas of life.
The problem is the EU doesnt have a clue who these people are moving around, are they legal, are they a criminal, are they isis? This upsets social cohesion for which there isnt really a monetry value comparison.
Migration does have benefits - but it must be done right, for example background checks, ensuring they speak the language so they intergrate and dont just make their own closed off communities like bolton, rochdale, bury, rotherham etc. The "type" of migration has been the problem, favouring unskilled europeans over educated commonwealth, no ensuring they learn english etc - many things done due to the pc brigade and a fear of upsetting anyone. And if at any point public services become stretched you also have the ability to freeze migration. So they key is quality, on our terms, for our needs when we need and want it and above all legally.
For me this is just common sense. At the moment we dont have that choice, we can plan or predict for public service spending because we dont have a clue how many people are going to come this year next year or 5 years time. To be able to plan you have to have control otherwise your always in a negative reactive knee jerk state spreading the pot thinner each time until like now things are at breaking point because its being used more than its currently alotted funds for , eg GPs hospitals, schools, housing.
A simplistic example lets say we allot a hospital in birmingham 1m for the year. Based on current population in the area, how many used it, how many times etc - and arrive at a figure of 1m to cover those needs.
Then we get x amount of migrants added who have not been accounted for, of course the hospital will struggle, then the same happens the year after and again. If we could say right we will take 5,000 migrants in 2017 because thats what our economy needs to grow - once that number is it, we close the doors until the year after. And work out how many we need if any, the following year. The governments first priorty should always be number 1 its own people and everything should be done on the basis of it being in our interests... 2nd would probably be financial and so on.

borkid

@mwpt people who will fill our skills shortages not just people who feel the UK would be better for them who have skills that we already have too many of. Austrailia and the other non EU countries select on skills I'm just saying that we should but we can't if we reamin in the EU. Comparing migration to say Australia and migration from EU countries to UK are not quite the same.