The thread for pointless arguments about Brexit

Moto2

**BREAKING NEWS**

We won't get a buffoon for a PM

Spidernick

HiToAll wrote: »

Also we get to get rid of immigrants who have set up camp in Sherwood Forest since the vote, according to Britain First leave voters.

By coincidence:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36323768

After a gap of three decades, the cult TV series Robin of Sherwood has made a comeback, in the form of an audio play.

Herzlos

Moto2 wrote: »

**BREAKING NEWS**

We won't get a buffoon for a PM

Unfortunately, we still have a choice of 2 other buffoons.

Moto2

Herzlos wrote: »

Unfortunately, we still have a choice of 2 other buffoons.

The other are - no doubt - odious t**ts but I didn't particularly marked down as buffoons

Out,_Vile_Jelly

We'll be seeing less of David Cameron's pink puffy porcine mug as he spends more time with his family.

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

Unfortunately, the lack of EU regulations will allow companies to do that anyway.

Well, yes, more people == more infrastructure, but also more money to pay for it.

Which should also mean better deals on bulk.
Because our government is short sighted and incompetent. None of that is a result of migrants.

I have some different questions, which I trust you'll answer directly:

1 - what do you think would happen if all of our foreigners just up and left overnight? Would we all be rolling in money, or would we be plunged into the dark ages?
2 - Assuming immigration is bad, what are you expecting Brexit to actually do about it? They've refused to commit to reducing numbers, and as far as I can see, won't have any ability to do so. Is the plan to make the UK so toxic that foreigners are scared off?

the price of labour (wages) is largely determined by sup[ply and demand: a large increase in supply tends to reduce wages.

yes more people means more infrastructure which mean higher taxes to pay for it with no overall per capita benefit plus a more crowded isle and worse housing.

A large trade deficit means more foreign exchange borrowing and less dividends flows for the next few generation: nothing to do with bulk buying

I agree whether the government is good or bad has nothing to do with immigration : they makes us worse off whatever the government does

I think 9 million people leaving suddenly is unlikely.
However a steady reduction in population would improve the quality of life, housing, wages etc of those that remain.

I would hope that the new government would seek immigration in the 10s of thousands, with immediate reduction in non EU migration and reducing EU migration asap.

CLAPTON

mwpt wrote: »

I HAVE ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION ALREADY!

It isn't difficult to understand. I'm not your little monkey dancing to your tune whenever you want to re-ask the same thing that I've already answered.

that's quite a lot of writing and posting to avoid a simple question :

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

I think 9 million people leaving suddenly is unlikely.
However a steady reduction in population would improve the quality of life, housing, wages etc of those that remain.

That wasn't the question. But why do you think the quality of life of the population would improve by the time the 9 million foreigners are out?

I would hope that the new government would seek immigration in the 10s of thousands, with immediate reduction in non EU migration and reducing EU migration asap.

How confident are you about either of those happening?

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

That wasn't the question. But why do you think the quality of life of the population would improve by the time the 9 million foreigners are out?



How confident are you about either of those happening?

I don't think 9 million foreigners would leave and I have no wish for them to do so

a modest reduction would enable better housing, less crowded road, rail, public transport, more space in schools and hospital
it would also reduce our imports and trade deficit and foreign borrowing and so better protect us in the future
it would also reduce the pressure on our wonderful mountains, coasts and beautiful countryside

basically overall there are no benefits for either global growth in population or national (except in some limited circumstances)
does anyone really believe that africa, asia, middle east , or the slums of South Ameria really benefit from more people?

Herzlos

CLAPTON wrote: »

I don't think 9 million foreigners would leave and I have no wish for them to do so

Do you fancy answering the question?

I'll shoot down your tangents once you've given me a straight answer.