EU referendum

[Metal Biker]

I've no interest in changing your mind, you are an irrelevance to me. But when you state things that are nonsense - like claiming people don't care about immigration being an issue - it's not inappropriate to say "rubbish".

Likewise, which is kind of what I did before you started getting all "foamy".

Again, I didn't state people don't care about immigration, I stated that people aren't too fussed about accepting or rejecting certain EU trading laws/stipulations since countries like China, US, India, Brazil etc do so without needing the same requirements. This could mean joining EEA, EFTA or renegotiating a brand new treaty with the EU, specific to the UK. THAT is what outers aren't fussed about; that FoM may be kept or discarded, either way they aren't fussed.

You don't like when others point out flaws in your viewpoint, do you. So, water under the bridge, and all that, let's focus on having a mature debate rather than nitpicking and selecting posts that help one's narrative.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I notice you've edited my post without putting it in full.

I quoted it in full, as others saw. You edited it afterwards having thought about how stupid your claim was. Perhaps you'd like me to ask a mod to show us your original post?

I'm done debating with you. As you say, you're entitled to your opinion. Good luck.

 

[Metal Biker]

I quoted it in full, as others saw. You edited it afterwards having thought about how stupid your claim was. Perhaps you'd like me to ask a mod to show us your original post?

I'm done debating with you. As you say, you're entitled to your opinion. Good luck.

No, you didn't, as my above post shows.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Likewise, which is kind of what I did before you started getting all "foamy".

Again, I didn't state people don't care about immigration

Really? Sorry we obviously misunderstood when you said "The UK may have to agree to continuing free movement of labour, but nobody really cares about that"

 

[Chippy_boy]

No, you didn't, as my above post shows.

It shows you edited it, nothing more.

 

[Metal Biker]

Really? Sorry we obviously misunderstood when you said "The UK may have to agree to continuing free movement of labour, but nobody really cares about that"

"comma, but nobody really cares about that, nor is it a sticking point as an argument to leave. It might be for some, but not all and from what i've seen its a minor complaint.But the fact remains that the EU MUST reach an agreement with any former member state."

I thought you were done debating with me?

 

[Metal Biker]

It shows you edited it, nothing more.

Did I really.

Okay, I guess we'll have to leave it there, won't we if you're going to start imagining things.

 

[blueonblue]

and the most recent available evidence tells us that that neither employment or wages are affected by immigration. Moreover, immigration is shown to have helped pay for public services, the idea that immigrants are a drain is a myth. Until any new studies come to light to support the contrary then I will continue in my view that immigration is not the problem that the right-wing media would have you believe it is.

The ones you posted that date back to before the restrictions were lifted ?, your statement is a nonsense as proved by common sense.

 

[BlueHammer85]

It's a shame that we can't have a reasonable debate about migration without resorting to accusations of 'racism' and name-calling.

I personally would sympathise with anyone who wants to vote 'out' based upon a direct experience of their employment or wages being affected by immigration. To have a proper debate however we must look at the evidence, and the most recent available evidence tells us that that neither employment or wages are affected by immigration. Moreover, immigration is shown to have helped pay for public services, the idea that immigrants are a drain is a myth. Until any new studies come to light to support the contrary then I will continue in my view that immigration is not the problem that the right-wing media would have you believe it is.

Housing on the other hand is a very real problem and I can understand the concerns of people who worry about the impact of a growing population as a result of growing net migration. This is a very real issue, however it is a domestic one to be sorted out by our governments. Suddenly restricting or even closing our borders will not result in a surge in the number of social houses being built, certainly not with this government because it is not in their interests to do so. They want to pursue a policy of private ownership, which is where their voters are. Unfortunately applying increased border controls will just drain us of the labour supply that contributes to the economy and tax receipts, tax receipts which should be going into housebuilding.

So whilst it might make people more comfortable to vote 'out' in order to try and solve a housing problem, think of who an out vote actually benefits. It's not the left, who would pursue investment in social housing and support services. The beneficiaries would be the right, the property owners and investors who will scoop up property and charge the earth for the lower classes to rent them.

Its not just the housing, but the strain on NHS and other services - i work in London, honestly - im lucky to fit on the train let alone get a seat now days - it was never like this about 10 years ago, traffic now days is unbearable in the south east and there's constant new builds going up. Im not anti immigration at all, but i did feel there is a population crisis on our hands and i cant see how having open borders will ease this problem

 

[Chippy_boy]

What you edited was, ""LOL" (are you 12?), I think you'll find they don't."

And you changed it to ""LOL" (are you 12?), I think you'll find they don't. I don't know of any outers personally who think we shouldn't trade at all with Europe."

That's what I said you edited, which you did. The added sentence is completely off topic since no-one is claiming that nor debating it. I can only guess you added it to seek to divert attention from your initial gaff.

As to my only quoting only the underlined part of your sentence, "The UK may have to agree to continuing free movement of labour, but nobody really cares about that, nor is it a sticking point as an argument to leave. It might be for some, but not all and from what i've seen its a minor complaint."?

Well that's pretty irrelevant whether I quote whole sentence or not. It's a ridiculous claim either in whole or in part.

 

[Metal Biker]

What you edited was, ""LOL" (are you 12?), I think you'll find they don't."

And you changed it to ""LOL" (are you 12?), I think you'll find they don't. I don't know of any outers personally who think we shouldn't trade at all with Europe."

That's what I said you edited, which you did. As to my only quoting only the underlined part of your sentence, "The UK may have to agree to continuing free movement of labour, but nobody really cares about that, nor is it a sticking point as an argument to leave. It might be for some, but not all and from what i've seen its a minor complaint."?

Well that's pretty irrelevant whether I quote whole sentence or not. It's a ridiculous claim either in whole or in part.

So you've gone from quoting an entirely different post, to calling me moronic, to saying it was nonsense, and now you've got a better understanding of it your view is now you feel it is a ridiculous 'claim', which is all it ever was, a claim, the ridiculousness of it is open to interpretation, I personally do not feel it is. (a ridiculous claim, I mean, not that it's not open to intepretation...you see what you've caused now?)

In regards to the second post (note it was about trading, not freedom of movement, which again was my train of thought) I added that because it was claer you'd misunderstood the previous post. I was trying to help you understand my point of view.

Saying it is irrelevant to quote the entirety of a post in its full context, which is a ludicrous statement to make, to then only discuss one certain part of it, could sound like you are admitting to being deliberatly disingenuous with the truth and your motives to hold a debate and sway opinion in your favour. I'm not accusing you of doing so, it's just how it looks to me at this stage. So I don't know which post has vexed you the most, right now. But as you said, you're through debating with me on it, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Chippy_boy]

But as you said, you're through debating with me on it, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

Fine with me.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Can you not see that the EU will destroy the economy, and push living standards down to those we had in this country a century ago at best?

I can see that there's many things wrong with it and that it certainly (in my view) stifles our growth, competitiveness and prosperity. In an ideal world, we'd be out of the EU, but freely trading with them in an unrestricted way and without having to sign up to a load of Euro nonsense. That would be great.

I just don't think that's in any way a realistic option. The realistic options I think are:

1. Stay in
2. Leave and leave the EEA completely
3. Leave the EU but negotiate to stay in the EEA, and be bound by the European Court of Human Rights, Working Time Directive, free movement of labour and everything else.

1. Is self explanatory
2. Would ruin our economy since Europe is our biggest export market
3. Would not provide much of what the Outers are seeking

 

[purplenose]

I can see that there's many things wrong with it and that it certainly (in my view) stifles our growth, competitiveness and prosperity. In an ideal world, we'd be out of the EU, but freely trading with them in an unrestricted way and without having to sign up to a load of Euro nonsense. That would be great.

I just don't think that's in any way a realistic option. The realistic options I think are:

1. Stay in
2. Leave and leave the EEA completely
3. Leave and stay in the EEA and be bound by the European Court of Human Rights, Working Time Directive, free movement of labour and everything else.

1. Is self explanatory
2. Would ruin our economy since Europe is our biggest export market
3. Would not provide much of what the Outers are seeking

I dont think we can dismiss what you say there...as many have said its a leap into the unknown in many respects. I dont think leaving would fix all our problems at all however, the EU is increasingly becoming unsustainable, it is now a powder keg that is going to go off sooner rather than later, and on every level being part of it when it does would certainly be far worse than any consequences of leaving. Massive immigration and forced integration ends in the same way every time. I am 51 and may not be around when it does blow but my kids will be, I would rather entrust the future of this country to a democratically elected government not some figurehead attempting to run a dangerous mix of cultures and former independant states.

In about 5 years or less there are going to be other current member countries of this disaster will have the courage to say no more and leave, at which point huge amounts of "refugees/immigrants" will flood into the remaining countries waving EU passports. What we have seen upto know is a small influx compared to what is to come. Lets face it you, I, Cameron Corbyn and anyone with a level of intelligence knows that soon Turkey will be part of this collective at which point we will effectivley open the door to everyone from every failed state to flood to these islands.

There has never been so much responsibility on this nations electorate, I only hope that they dont live to regret the chance they have to not only take control of there own country, but to once again lead the way for other nations to follow. We are geographically part of Europe and with a couple of notable exeptions been able to live quite nicely side by side with all those other European nations and that should continue....but not at the cost of being an independant country able to say with whom we do business and who can decide exactly who can come here for whatever purpose.

 

[sir baconface]

As usual, few people feel free to say what they really believe on the immigration issue. Just not the done thing, old boy.

It's usually simplified by inners to "immigration brings benefits".

Well yes, a significant proportion of immigrants have added brains, drive, desirable skill-sets, vibrancy, etc, etc. And a certain proportion have formed semi-closed communities and/or contributed to drugs/gun/sex crime and/or been a drain on resources. We also have to remember that population predictions of 80m or whatever on an island of this size have major consequences. Which makes the argument simplistic.

So what the outers seek is (a) some sort of control over numbers, and (b) a say over the skills we want and don't want.

Not sure what's difficult to understand here.

 

[SWP's back]

No it doesn't - I haven't even read the report. Honestly if people were to think clearly and carefully about this without getting all emotional (I am not suggest you are, by the way), I think it would be pretty clear to them how damaging leaving the EU would be. In time, of course we'd get over it and as I have said a number of times, in the long run we may be better off for it.

But there's no realistic scenario where we wouldn't be worse off in the short term, or even the medium term. At the very very least, we'd have several years of uncertainty hanging over our economy and if there's one thing business doesn't like, it's uncertainty.

I've spelled out in crystal clear terms why the EU could not and would not agree to us having un-restricted, no-strings, free trade terms. People who choose to ignore these arguments do so I think, because *emotionally* they want to leave and they are doing a metaphorical "I'm not listening, I'm not listening, I'm not listening" when faced with a cogent argument as to why it's a very bad idea.

And I think your reasoning is both overly timid and wrong.

 

[purplenose]

As usual, few people feel free to say what they really believe on the immigration issue. Just not the done thing, old boy.

It's usually simplified by inners to "immigration brings benefits".

Well yes, a significant proportion of immigrants have added brains, drive, desirable skill-sets, vibrancy, etc, etc. And a certain proportion have formed semi-closed communities and/or contributed to drugs/gun/sex crime and/or been a drain on resources. We also have to remember that population predictions of 80m or whatever on an island of this size have major consequences. Which makes the argument simplistic.

So what the outers seek is (a) some sort of control over numbers, and (b) a say over the skills we want and don't want.

Not sure what's difficult to understand here.

Very easy to understand, the inners refuse to accept any of what you say.....on account of the old "i,m all right jack" to hell with the consequences of future generations.

 

[YPhrunts]

Its not just the housing, but the strain on NHS and other services - i work in London, honestly - im lucky to fit on the train let alone get a seat now days - it was never like this about 10 years ago, traffic now days is unbearable in the south east and there's constant new builds going up. Im not anti immigration at all, but i did feel there is a population crisis on our hands and i cant see how having open borders will ease this problem

You are right. The congestion on the roads in and around Kent has to be experienced on a daily basis to be appreciated as the living nightmare Kent has become. In a lot of our Market towns you can't find a parking space during main shopping hours. It's no good people suggesting that we should build more car parks because there just isn't the space available. Most of the available parking spaces are under tarmac already. The way around it is to start building shopping centres out of town that people have to drive to and that leads to yet more congestion on the roads. It's a sprawl that is eating into the green belt. The 'inners' won't be happy until this country becomes a massive Hong Kong..god help us.

 

[bluethrunthru]

I take it you cannot remember what it was like before we were frog marched into the common market by Ted Heath then. And I really can't be arsed to go into the miriade number of stupid regulations that have been forced on us over the years. Because they are stupid. But here's a couple....like not being allowed to climb a ladder higher than 3 metres so that an unscrupulous builder can charge you an arm and a leg to erect scaffolding and use the EU as an excuse to extort money from you. Or an interference with individual freedoms like the ban on being able to slaughter your own animals that you kept for food etc. You now have to transport them causing the animal stress in transport and even more stress on entering an abattoir.
.

Not sure I understand that Health and Safety rules should be viewed as a stupid regulation. Working at heights rules are as much the product of H&S as they are of "faceless bureaucrats in Brussels". You also make the massive leap of assuming that such regulations when adopted inside the EU wouldn't have been seen as common sense and adopted in the UK anyway. Most people in the industry would quote the reason for using scaffolding is a fear of being sued by the family of a late employee who fell off a ladder not the EU. Is that the insurance industry's fault the EU's fault or the adoption of safe working practices?

As for your slaughtering idea again how much is the EU to blame? I'd say good common sense food hygiene practices are behind that - they try to ensure that unlike other countries we don't get horsemeat into the food chain. Its a common misconception to conflate prejudices around the EU with "daft rules imposed by Brussels". In many cases these are there for good reasons to protect people or are just plain wrong - Google it and see how many straight banana and cucumber scare stories turn out to be just lies....

 

[adrianr]

Its not just the housing, but the strain on NHS and other services - i work in London, honestly - im lucky to fit on the train let alone get a seat now days - it was never like this about 10 years ago, traffic now days is unbearable in the south east and there's constant new builds going up. Im not anti immigration at all, but i did feel there is a population crisis on our hands and i cant see how having open borders will ease this problem

And if you believe the rumours that large amounts of new builds in and around London lay dormant on account of foreign 'investment', we're probably not straining the services as much as we could be. It's an odd time for my peers and I in London at the moment - We're all fairly resigned to being priced out eventually, unless we're happy to live our entire lives in studio flats (shared, of course). But we need business to move with us, or we're just exchanging one nightmare for another.