The Trade Implications of Brexit....

CLAPTON

Herzlos wrote: »

We need them now. They run and pay for our infrastructure.

Mostly in the pockets of our political leaders and their country club buddies.
Plus, where do you get 9 million from? Only figure I've found is 7.9 million URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the_United_Kingdom"]citation[/URL. I really think you're exaggerating the problem.

Since immigration is a net poitive for the coffers, how much of an increase would you pay to avoid immigration?

Why not? Its a real issue unlike immigation.


Why does it matter if they are native born or not, if your concern is about strain on infrastructure? Or is it really about immigrants?

so you are content with the access to NHS, housing, schools, transport etc

that's good I can see why you are happy with more immigration

CLAPTON

Kohoutek wrote: »

. However presumably maintaining equivalence with EU regulations would be an affront to Brexiteers' wish for greater 'sovereignty'.

why ever would you say that?

you seem to understand nothing about how trade works.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

CLAPTON wrote: »

Japan has very low level of immigration so an excellent example of what could have been achieved if we directed our efforts to the support of native born population rather than having to struggle with the burdens of high levels of immigration.

Stuff and nonsense.

Japan has racked up the highest national debt in the World, over 200% of GDP and rising fast, precisely because they're utterly unable to pay for the ageing population with declining numbers of young working age people.

They've crippled future generations of their young with a colossal debt burden to pay for their dislike of immigration.

The only thing they're an excellent example of is proving the disastrous effect of low immigration on a country with increasing numbers of old and not enough young.

yessuz

CLAPTON wrote: »

obviously not



I don't have an ideal population size but I think that the world doesn't need an increasing population and neither does the UK.

What costs are you concerned about?

so, with the ageing population.. who would pay your pension and your NHS costs when you'll become a pensioner?

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Stuff and nonsense.

Japan has racked up the highest national debt in the World, over 200% of GDP and rising fast, precisely because they're utterly unable to pay for the ageing population with declining numbers of young working age people.

They've crippled future generations of their young with a colossal debt burden to pay for their dislike of immigration.

The only thing they're an excellent example of is proving the disastrous effect of low immigration on a country with increasing numbers of old and not enough young.

look its Herzlos that things are wonderful in Japan

why not leave out the middle man and have a direct conversation with him?

CLAPTON

yessuz wrote: »

so, with the ageing population.. who would pay your pension and your NHS costs when you'll become a pensioner?

as always, older people (and children and disabled and unemployed a and the idle rich ) will have a share of the goods and services being produced at that time

yessuz

CLAPTON wrote: »

so you are content with the access to NHS, housing, schools, transport etc

that's good I can see why you are happy with more immigration

so you say, that additional 5% of population (who are EU citizens, and who actually, contributes towards infrastructure costs as they pay taxes and where MAJORITY of them - do not use NHS services) crippled NHS?

Around 3.2 million people living in the UK in 2015 were citizens of another EU country. That’s about 5% of the UK population. A similar proportion were born in the rest of the EU.

Over 2.2 million nationals of other EU countries are in work, as of earlier this year. That’s about 7% of people in work – the highest on record.

Also, if you would even say that there are 9 million of immigrants in UK - having official figures of max at 4 million (with more than 10% increase vs actual figures), it means that more than a half of those immigrants are from outside EU.
what means that UK has ALL THE MEANS to reduce such immigration. even being part of EU. because you know, they are not from EU.

so what's the point to leave EU??

yessuz

CLAPTON wrote: »

as always, older people (and children and disabled and unemployed a and the idle rich ) will have a share of the goods and services being produced at that time

so, you would say that it would be great, if .gov would send you/your parents a letter, saying:
"sorry mr and mrs Claptons, but due to financial constrains, we have to reduce your pensions/disability benefits/subsidies/etc. by 20%"??

* percentage is hypothetical

p.s. that thing sounds like comunism/socialism. it does not work. proven many times, especially in Eastern Europe.

CLAPTON

yessuz wrote: »

so you say, that additional 5% of population (who are EU citizens, and who actually, contributes towards infrastructure costs as they pay taxes and where MAJORITY of them - do not use NHS services) crippled NHS?


Also, if you would even say that there are 9 million of immigrants in UK - having official figures of max at 4 million (with more than 10% increase vs actual figures), it means that more than a half of those immigrants are from outside EU.
what means that UK has ALL THE MEANS to reduce such immigration. even being part of EU. because you know, they are not from EU.

so what's the point to leave EU??

I don't really understand what you are saying

you seem (and I apologise if I misunderstood) that you want to discriminate against all people who come from non white, non christian, non european countries:
have I understand that correctly?

CLAPTON

yessuz wrote: »

so, you would say that it would be great, if .gov would send you/your parents a letter, saying:
"sorry mr and mrs Claptons, but due to financial constrains, we have to reduce your pensions/disability benefits/subsidies/etc. by 20%"??

* percentage is hypothetical

p.s. that thing sounds like comunism/socialism. it does not work. proven many times, especially in Eastern Europe.

no more or less than people now are unable to live in decent family sized house, access health service, suffer poor schools for their children, suffer terrible pension returns due the the economic circumstances.