If there is a second referendum ...

BobQ

kabayiri wrote: »

When it comes to skills in demand, the sources of supply can change pretty quickly.

Go back to the 80s and nobody would have looked at India for IT skills.

Barely a generation+ later, and it's one of the biggest sources.

I'm not quite sure why we would place a Hungarian at a premium to a Chinese or Korean engineer.

We don't do that with finished product. Typically now, we consume from wherever on the planet makes most sense.

You make a valid point that sources of skills change over time and I do not see why we should not use non-EU labour when it is available and suitable for the jobs we have.

But whether we employ Indian or Korean labour is surely a matter of immigration policy and we could have done this without leaving
the EU?

My recollection is that a significant minority of the public (based on polls) wanted to stop immigration irrespective of ts source (I suspect we agree that this is madness).

Enterprise_1701C

badmemory wrote: »

I do think this whole 52/48 vote is scarily close. After all, if it was a room full of 100 people & 52 had voted for something & 48 against, how many times do you think the vote counters would have checked the numbers voting for & against? At least 3 times, unless the people counting had a vested interest in the for vote of course.

re we really prepared to say that we have disenfranchised 48% of voters? That they should have absolutely no impact on the world they are going to have to live in? That they are supposed not to care that they are going to lose their jobs? Are we prepared to live in a dictatorship? Unfortunately, it seems the answer to this is yes.

That and the whole shebang based on lies. No wonder we are the laughing stock of the world! If I go abroad in the next year or so I am gonig to say I'm Canadian or Australian, because I don't want the embarrassment of being British, what a sorry tale!

So, because 48% voted to remain, you think we should remain? You talk about "disenfranchising" 48% of people that voted, but it appears that you want to do the same to the 52% of people that voted out! And taking a vote in a closed room is not difficult, you just get people to stand on opposite sides and count, it doesn't need checking three times, and we certainly do not need another couple of votes on the subject!

As for being based on lies, the lies came from both sides, and that Remain leaflet published and distributed by the government, that was £9 million not even counted in the sums!

BobQ wrote: »

You make a valid point that sources of skills change over time and I do not see why we should not use non-EU labour when it is available and suitable for the jobs we have.

But whether we employ Indian or Korean labour is surely a matter of immigration policy and we could have done this without leaving
the EU?

My recollection is that a significant minority of the public (based on polls) wanted to stop immigration irrespective of ts source (I suspect we agree that this is madness).

What we NEED is to be able to admit people with the skills that we need, regardless of where they come from.

Of course, what would be preferable is to start training our people again, we have spent too long expecting to be able to employ immigrants with the skills needed, how about giving our youngsters a chance?

You talk about needing fruit pickers etc. Well, I used to do that in the school holidays and after school, the fruit and veg got picked and we got paid. Now the kids don't get that work anymore, they struggle to find holiday work and don't learn what it is like to work before they start a full time job, they don't get chance to learn the work ethic. I for one am prepared to say that it was not the kids that gave up on the work, but the work disappeared because of the seasonal immigration. And those groups of immigrants run by gang masters or whatever they are called, the ones that go around in groups of caravans or tents and then go home when they have finished picking the fruit, they do not contribute to the economy, they tend to send the money they make back to whichever country they come from. At least if teens have a chance to pick that fruit or veg they spend the money!

System

badmemory wrote: »

Are we really prepared to say that we have disenfranchised 48% of voters? !

Obviously yes, on a question that has only two opposing answers.


If a few years ago we'd had a referendum on hanging, the vote might have been 52/48. Obviously you can't half-hang someone.
It's the same with lots of controversial questions. You can't be half-nuclear, half in favour of kindness, protection of vulnerable, environment, gay marriage, and loads of other things.


It shows the stupidity of trying to equate democracy with mere comparison of numbers, and of referendums in particular.
That's why until now we've had a representative democracy. We elect people we believe are good and attuned to the feelings of their electorate, and then we trust them to do the best thay can and support a government and a prime minister who show a lead.


Leadership means being ahead of events and people's inadequately expressed wishes. It's not agonising over 52/48 figures. They have the confidence to lead, and then periodically by general elections are judged on the results.

BLB53

I do think this whole 52/48 vote is scarily close.

Fairly close but decisive...leave won. Unfortunately we seem to have a hardcore rump of the population who still refuse to accept the outcome and are trying every trick in the book to delay the inevitable. For me this is unacceptable and just plain wrong.

Instead of politicians trying to keep remainers happy - trying to please both sides and ending up pleasing neither - they should have been clear from the start that we were leaving - preferably with a deal but all the time having 'no deal' in reserve as plan B.

badmemory

BLB53 wrote: »

Fairly close but decisive...leave won.

Sorry but 4% is not decisive. We have had governments based on a negative 4% of the vote.


But I have to say that my alternative to remain has to be a no deal leave. This is what I am planning for/expecting.



I am going to the sales to buy another freezer to fill with my favourite imported foods. It will also have to include some british grown food too as they will have to be shared out over a much larger population due to the shortages of imported. This is a total reversal for me. Anyone old enough to remember the sugar shortage? I refused to stockpile then as those who were unable to stockpile should not be deprived just because they could not afford it.



We are stuck in a country that has sold (against my wishes) all the infrastructure to leave's hated foreigners & is now sticking up 2 fingers to those same people.


When considering whether you can trust governments (ethics, honesty, etc etc) perhaps you should bear in mind that when they sold off BT to the lowest bidder (as in seriously undervalued the share value) they were selling off the main form of communication between all the security systems in the country.

kabayiri

badmemory wrote: »

...
We are stuck in a country that has sold (against my wishes) all the infrastructure to leave's hated foreigners & is now sticking up 2 fingers to those same people.


When considering whether you can trust governments (ethics, honesty, etc etc) perhaps you should bear in mind that when they sold off BT to the lowest bidder (as in seriously undervalued the share value) they were selling off the main form of communication between all the security systems in the country.

It's got little to do with foreigners in an outright sense.

We have had decades of migration, around the 30K per annum level, and it was fairly sustainable. Nobody really complained that much.

But something changed in the last couple of decades. There was a conscious decision to treat mass labour as a commodity.

Personally I think this is evidence that big business drives the narrative these days.

The role of the nation state is diminishing. That's why we get hollowed out politicians with little conviction. They are just administrators for the EU narrative now.

If you can't trust these people, the natural next step is to work out how to make money out of the resulting change. Brexit is going to be difficult, but it's also an opportunity to make money.

badmemory

kabayiri wrote: »

But something changed in the last couple of decades. There was a conscious decision to treat mass labour as a commodity.

Personally I think this is evidence that big business drives the narrative these days.

The role of the nation state is diminishing. That's why we get hollowed out politicians with little conviction. They are just administrators for the EU narrative now.

If you can't trust these people, the natural next step is to work out how to make money out of the resulting change. Brexit is going to be difficult, but it's also an opportunity to make money.

I agree, but unfortunately that mass labour has decided that the foreigner IS responsible & absolutely none of that mass labour is going to make any money out of it & many are going to land up unemployed in a country that no longer gives a sh** about its own people or if they are going to be made homeless based on their own lies. We are back in the early 1800s & nobody gives a damn!

badmemory

kabayiri wrote: »

But something changed in the last couple of decades. There was a conscious decision to treat mass labour as a commodity.

Personally I think this is evidence that big business drives the narrative these days.

The role of the nation state is diminishing. That's why we get hollowed out politicians with little conviction. They are just administrators for the EU narrative now.

If you can't trust these people, the natural next step is to work out how to make money out of the resulting change. Brexit is going to be difficult, but it's also an opportunity to make money.

I agree, but unfortunately that mass labour has decided that the foreigner IS responsible & absolutely none of that mass labour is going to make any money out of it & many are going to land up unemployed in a country that no longer gives a sh** about its own people or if they are going to be made homeless based on their own lies. We are back in the early 1900s & nobody gives a damn!

kabayiri

badmemory wrote: »

I agree, but unfortunately that mass labour has decided that the foreigner IS responsible & absolutely none of that mass labour is going to make any money out of it & many are going to land up unemployed in a country that no longer gives a sh** about its own people or if they are going to be made homeless based on their own lies. We are back in the early 1900s & nobody gives a damn!

I tried to listen to a lot of vox pop style interviews in the Brexit referendum. It's easy to do with social media nowadays, and I find it interesting how different groups/regions see things.

I did a similar thing during the Trump presidential campaign.

If you close your eyes, listen to the words, and just swap out local names, the narrative is remarkably similar.

Maybe it's just evidence of ordinary people struggling with change. It's just as true in the USA as it is here.

Dave Cameron was supposed to be a smart man, but his understanding of timing when calling a referendum was poor to non-existent. Still...history now I suppose.

BLB53

Sorry but 4% is not decisive. We have had governments based on a negative 4% of the vote.

Of course it's decisive...we only needed 50% + 1 but we got well over a million more people wanting to leave and the turnout was very high. Also, unlike a general election, every vote counted whether remain or leave.

Now we either respect the democratic vote and all get behind the leaving process however much some people think it is a big mistake or we continue trying to please remainers and end up with a wishy washy, half-in half-out Brexit in name only which would not respect the referendum.

The respecting of our democracy is far more valuable than the benefits of remaining.

I do not know whether the decision will turn out to be good or a disaster but I do strongly believe we ALL need to respect the decision.