Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

Takedap

Theophile wrote: »

Yes, the one thing that's going to happen is a levelling of wealth and living standards between the previous poor countries and the rich ones.
As such, the A8 enlargement has been a huge success.
Take a trip to Prague, Vilnius or Gdansk and have a look at their living standards, you might be surprised.


And, as mentioned so often before, from 2004, there were mechanisms in place to restrict immigration from A8 accesion countries. The UK decided not to implement these.

It is much better for all involved that the Eastern European countries are permitted to join & then allowed to reach a similar standard to the rest.


The levelling of living standards is the equivalent of living with neighbours with similar values or choosing to live in a gated community where the massively rich are frightened of the poorer masses outside.


Eventually net recipients become net contributors.

Tromking

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

I don't deny there may be remainers who feel we should leave because of the referendum. But, for the billionth time, what does leaving mean? On what terms? What is there a mandate for??

I have previously explained in excruciating detail how the EU is not as undemocratic as Brexiters like to shout. But I have learn it is is pointless to discuss that with Brexiters who have a problem with the truth.

I’ve probably read your thesis on the democratic accountability of EU institutions and like most Leave voters filed it in the wishful thinking box file.
Thanks anyway.
On the subject of what does Leave mean, speaking personally i’ll tell you when it happens.
When the politicians handed over the decision on our continued membership of the EU to the likes of me and you, they did not extend that franchise to include my opinion on how we leave.
Like 80% of us in the last election I voted for a party that would honour the referendum result, it’s not my fault most of them have worked in the opposite direction for two years.

Takedap

Theophile wrote: »

Yesterday's 'Have I Got News For You' pulled over Heidi Allen European election impartiality concern.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/have-i-got-news-for-you-pulled-backlash-as-bbc-pulls-show-over-heidi-allen-european-election-a4139796.html


But giving a platform to Farage on QT on Thursday was ok.

Not wishing to stand up for Farage in any way but...


The QT appearance was part of a balanced program which also gave (for instance) Anna Soubry a chance to speak.


HIGNFY was just one point of view.

Takedap

Tromking wrote: »

On the subject of what does Leave mean, speaking personally i’ll tell you when it happens.
When the politicians handed over the decision on our continued membership of the EU to the likes of me and you, they did not extend that franchise to include my opinion on how we leave.

Sorry but to me that translates as "I don't know what I want but I'm going to complain because I haven't got it"

Tromking

Takedap wrote: »

Sorry but to me that translates as "I don't know what I want but I'm going to complain because I haven't got it"

Not so much complaining as waiting for the referendum result to be enacted. You talk as if the decision to leave hasn’t already been made.

Takedap

Tromking wrote: »

Not so much complaining as waiting for the referendum result to be enacted. You talk as if the decision to leave hasn’t already been made.

So you'll be happy with whatever the politicians decide on your behalf?


Whether that'll be a May deal; a May/Corbyn deal; A Norway style deal; a WTO deal or a custom made one-off never before thought of deal?


You'd be happy with any one of the above?

Herzlos

Tromking wrote: »

I commented on a tiny part of the documentary I had seen and caveated that by saying I hadn’t watched the rest.

wintersunshine wrote: »

It'll cost billions. I don't think that's what people care about....there is better ways to spend people's hard earned taxes and it's just weird that he sees that as a priority.

!!!!!! spend billions on buying water companies. No. Build some houses.

Spending our money to try and improve our services seems fair. Like rail, why are we subsidising private companies who make a profit when we can just do it ourselves?

Herzlos

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

When the eu decide to do this there won't be a veto available, it will be done by qmv. The vetos will disappear soon anyway, the eu have a habit of finding ways to do what they want, goal posts have moved massively sine 1975.

Can you explain the mechanism by which the EU will remove the vetoes from countries that have them? I don't follow it.

phillw

Tromking wrote: »

You deny the existence of Remain voters who feel quite strongly that the first vote must enacted for the sake of democracy?

Why does it matter how strongly people feel? I thought this was politics and not some play ground game.

wintersunshine wrote: »

It'll cost billions. I don't think that's what people care about....there is better ways to spend people's hard earned taxes and it's just weird that he sees that as a priority.

So instead we should let the water companies take our hard earned money and give it to investors?

billions sounds quite cheap for the long term benefit it would have, but then the money we give to the EU each year is a pittance and yet half the country has no concept of money and makes strange choices based on that lack of knowledge.

From a quick google it looks like water bills for the uk are about 10 billion a year, not all of that is profit of course but having that income into the government doesn't sound like a bad return to me.

StevieJ

ukcarper wrote: »

I am a remain voter who feels we should leave, I think the main reason people voted to leave were four freedoms ECJ and ability to make our own trade deals. As a reamain voter who feels we should leave I think at least some of those should be addressed. I suspect many leave voters would say they all should be addressed but the vote was close and I think a compromise is needed.

So you don't believe that immigration (and its 'spin offs' e.g visiting the doctor, undermining wages and simple racism) were a major reason? They must have been wasting their money on printing posters like this then?