Brexit, the economy and house prices (Part 3)

mayonnaise

mrginge wrote: »

I voted for it and am absolutely loving it. In fact I find it hilarious.

Perfectly understandable position for someone with no skin in the game.

setmefree2

Originally Posted by CKhalvashi

I am reasonably vocal off the forum too, and will continue to be so. My job is to serve the needs of my clients, and one of those needs is access to the UK for music touring purposes. For any UK clients there is a need for the ability to tour Europe as efficiently as possible. My view is that the single market (at the moment via the EU) is the easiest way of ensuring that is possible all round.

We don't need everybody to have free movement just so a few musicians can tour Europe. Musicians manage to tour the planet without free movement.

This is also another solution.

The chief executive of UK Music, Michael Dugher, has pushed for the British government to end the “uncertainty and lack of clarity” following the Brexit decision, and introduce a EU-wide live music ‘passport’ for British musicians, who need to tour freely throughout Europe.

http://www.theindustryobserver.com.au/uk-music-call-for-a-europe-wide-live-music-passport/

setmefree2

If we do look specifically at how people would vote in a referendum tomorrow, there is comparatively little change since 2016. Most Remain voters would still vote Remain, most Leave voters would still vote Leave. People who did not vote at all in 2016 tend to split in favour of Remain, meaning that the overall figure tends to be around a 50-50 split. Polls, of course, typically have a margin of error of around 2 or 3 points. This means if the actual position is a 50-50 split, then normal sample variation will inevitably spit out some results that are 52-48, or 48-52, or whatever. This is the unavoidable result of normal statistical variance, however, it does mean that now and again there will be a poll showing Remain with a small lead, which pro-Remain sorts will get wrongly overexcited about.

In summary, there hasn’t been any vast sea-change in attitudes towards Brexit. Most people who voted Remain would do so again, most people who voted Leave would do so again. There is some movement back and forth, but it mostly cancels itself out. If you look at the two most frequently repeated questions, the BMG question on referendum VI and the YouGov question on whether the decision was right or wrong, then there does appear to be movement towards Remain… but it is as yet pretty small and pretty slow. In short, there are some “bregrets”, but not enough to really get excited about.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

setmefree2 wrote: »

We don't need everybody to have free movement just so a few musicians can tour Europe. Musicians manage to tour the planet without free movement.

This is also another solution.

a EU-wide live music ‘passport’ for British musicians, who need to tour freely throughout Europe

Which is great and all, but then you also need the same type of arrangements for numerous other fields of employment.

For all the anti-immigration rhetoric of the Brexiteers, I'm yet to hear anyone in government tell business and industry which section of the economy they want to starve of labour?

Because every time one or another of those employers heads over to Downing street and points out that UK unemployment is at near record lows and hiring staff is already bl00dy difficult, the government makes reassuring comments and insists they have no intention of starving any sector of vitally needed labour.

So it seems we'll have special dispensation for the car industry, the hospitality industry, the technology industry, food producers, the NHS, agriculture, care workers, schools and universities, etc, etc, etc.... So pretty much all the major employers of immigrants.

And now you're suggesting that we make up new schemes to enable British workers like musicians to travel and work freely throughout the EU.

In fact other than hand car washers (who will be a tiny fraction of a percent of migrants) I can't think of a single sector of business that almost everyone can agree it wouldn't be a huge loss to society if they were starved of migrant labour.

And the pressure is already growing from British workers who work overseas in numerous roles (some skilled, some not) to arrange reciprocal schemes.

This seems like a lot of work, cost, bureaucracy and red tape to basically duplicate the benefits of free movement for the vast majority of workers.

kabayiri

The world is awash with labour, and as technology continues to allow machines to replace humans, the supply situation will only increase.

Employers only really look at the short term situation. It's important for the government to look at the longer term direction.

If we truly want cheap migrant labour, then we can find it much much cheaper elsewhere than in Europe. It's just a matter of political will.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

kabayiri wrote: »

The world is awash with labour, and as technology continues to allow machines to replace humans, the supply situation will only increase.

And yet UK unemployment is at near record lows while UK employment is at record highs.

A surplus of Labour in Peru doesn't help the shortage of labour here.

Employers only really look at the short term situation. It's important for the government to look at the longer term direction.

Employers need labour today otherwise their businesses fail.

The longer term direction is that the UK economy is getting starved of labour and needs more people.

Largely because we failed to breed at the replacement rate for the last 50 years.

If we truly want cheap migrant labour, then we can find it much much cheaper elsewhere than in Europe. It's just a matter of political will.

And you know as well as I do that large segments of Little Britain howl in outrage about the UK 'losing it's culture' and becoming a 'mini United Nations' when we import Europeans who are nearly culturally identical to us but they then they hear a handful of foreign sounding accents on their high street...

I can only imagine how outraged they'd be if we imported genuinely cheap labour en-masse from Asia or Africa instead.... And the good residents of Whinging-On-Thames then had to immerse themselves in actual, honest-to-god, proper cultural diversity instead of just hearing a few foreign accents from people that otherwise look and act just like them.

Like it or not there is precisely ZERO political will to do that.

Absolutely none whatsoever.....

We'll keep importing people en-masse from the EU because it's right next door, it's culturally near identical, and the well trained and motivated workers coming from workplaces with pretty much the same standards and systems can immediately fit in.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

mayonnaise wrote: »

This Week, 21 September (that's after T's speech, Jock )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-Kxt8E8kGs
(from around the 4.55 mark)

You're struggling, Jock.

Oh deary me, another one experiencing a "Specsavers" moment".
Either that or attempting to be deliberately disingenuous; which one is it, Mayo?

The show title you link to is "This Week".
For those unaware, it reviews what has happened earlier in the week.
So (yet again) what was said by Tim Martin was before TM's Florence speech.

You are indeed struggling, Mayo.
A request for less vinegar would appear to be in order.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Moby wrote: »

10 out of 10 for finding such an obscure source. Can just imagine you Jock trawling to page 150 on your Google search to find something. Can you find anything even more obscure?;)

The Independent is "obscure"?
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:


Well watch out Moby, here's another "obscure" report:
"David Davis dismisses 'made up' £40bn Brexit bill"

Brexit Secretary also said the power of the European Court of Justice in the UK will end in 2019

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-davis-brexit-bill-eu-conservative-party-tory-cabinet-civil-war-theresa-may-boris-johnson-a7963936.html

mrginge

mayonnaise wrote: »

Perfectly understandable position for someone with no skin in the game.

Ah the great oracle speaks.

Such irony from someone who becries the uneducated being allowed to voice opinions on subjects they know nothing about.

kabayiri

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

...
And you know as well as I do that large segments of Little Britain howl in outrage about the UK 'losing it's culture' and becoming a 'mini United Nations' when we import Europeans who are nearly culturally identical to us but they then they hear a handful of foreign sounding accents on their high street...
...

It is not written in stone that you need to import people on a permanent basis. Demand for labour has fluctuated throughout history, as we ourselves have changed.

We export work to places where we do not worry about culture. So, we can also import people on a transient basis.

This is exactly what multi-national companies do. They move production centres around, according to changing need.

You are conflating labour with population to drive your own agenda, I understand that.