EU referendum

[Zuriblue]

An alleged convo in 2011? Rofl

And an opinion piece in the same paper by the same writer (Tom Newton-Dunn) demanding that the Queen lets us know what she thinks. In other words he doesn't know so he's made it up out of whole cloth.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Ahh so you're a Blairite. That was his reasoning to the letter. I don't think anybody is arguing that some immigration is not a good thing including UKIP but unfettered immigration just leads to overcrowding as people from the poorer states flock to the richer states for benefits of work and standard of living as well as the free loading. If the infrastructure can cope with it then fine but it's struggling at the moment and on its present course can only get worse. I'll leave out the problem of incompatible religion as that is a subject in itself.

How many of the EU immigrants are of a different religion? If that is an argument we should be taking more from the EU and should have lowered commonwealth immigration.

As shown in those figures if the EU immigration is net positive how are hey free losing. If you are talking about immigration from outside the EU then that's a separate issue and shouldn't be blamed on the EU.

A bigger impact on infrastructure is government cuts and aged assets not being invested in rather than immigrants, you are thinking how the government want you to think.

The above is realism and the world we live in, I am not sure that is Blairism unless you really think Blair was a politician in touch with reality.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Well, apparently, the racist, fascist EU is starting to remove all these valuable immigrants from Western Europe, so they've obviously
not read of the untold benefits that mass immigration brings on here.

They are refugees with no rights to work and are not even allowed to economically contribute if they want to. So it is a nonsense comparison, it is a separate issue, different people and different countries you are talking about.

The refugees are a moral question , the economic EU migrant issue is really a test of whether you trust capitalism.

I've always strongly believed in personal responsibility as an individual and society. If we are part of the cause for a refugee crisis we have to be part of the solution but that is a separate issue and shouldn't be confused

 

[EalingBlue2]

And an opinion piece in the same paper by the same writer (Tom Newton-Dunn) demanding that the Queen lets us know what she thinks. In other words he doesn't know so he's made it up out of whole cloth.

So he thinks the queen should undermine every principle that has maintained the monarchy and the UK political system. The queen ever takes sides in politics and the monarchy won't see out the decade

 

[Ancient Citizen]

so your an inner now? flip flopper

Not quite.

 

[BigJoe#1]

So he thinks the queen should undermine every principle that has maintained the monarchy and the UK political system. The queen ever takes sides in politics and the monarchy won't see out the decade

Except it is considered that she DID take sides in the Scottish referendum. Not full on, not hardcore but subtle and persuasive.

 

[EalingBlue2]

Except it is considered that she DID take sides in the Scottish referendum. Not full on, not hardcore but subtle and persuasive.

We will see how things pan out but it is not inconceivable that Scotland will be a republic in a decade

 

[blueonblue]

We don't currently have an excess in the workforce and I'm not sure we have run out of any schools, houses or hospitals either have we? And why is it finite? We've been closing schools and hospitals for the whole of my lifetime.

Millions on the dole IS an excess of workforce.
There are shortfalls in school places resulting in overcrowded classes, only last week there was the warning your kids have little chance of choice of school in many area`s resulting in busing kids about.
No shortage of houses ... Explain housing waiting lists and the homeless
No shortage of hospitals ?...Waiting lists/canceled surgery/ people on trolleys for 17 hours in A&E (Personal experience) due to lack of beds.

Very selective use of facts when talking about closures, yes they have closed both, either because they were in the wrong place for the population or amalgamated into a more specialized unit to try and make more efficient ( A policy I personalty do not agree with, but then it was a labour policy )

NO country in Europe or anywhere else has ever been subject to mass uncontrolled immigration, even the masses of refugees from world war two were documented and controlled, the EU is now proposing to break international law and pay billions to get rid of what you call a valuable asset.

 

[BigJoe#1]

We will see how things pan out but it is not inconceivable that Scotland will be a republic in a decade

If Britain votes to leave you may well be correct.

 

[Monkfish]

Millions on the dole IS an excess of workforce.
2 jobs available for every jobseeker

There are shortfalls in school places resulting in overcrowded classes, only last week there was the warning your kids have little chance of choice of school in many area`s resulting in busing kids about.
Boo diddley hoo Madison didn't get her chosen school, panic on the streets of Carlisle... Classroom sizes are getting bigger as education budget it getting cut, not complicated

No shortage of houses ... Explain housing waiting lists and the homeless
Plenty houses, just people are picky where they want to live, and there will always be homeless people, afraid some just fall through societies cracks expecially now 'theres no such thing as society'

No shortage of hospitals ?...Waiting lists/canceled surgery/ people on trolleys for 17 hours in A&E (Personal experience) due to lack of beds.
We pay less on healthcare than pretty much every other developed country, hence lack of beds, waiting lists etc, want better, campiagn for tax increase to pay for better

 

[Ancient Citizen]

They are refugees with no rights to work and are not even allowed to economically contribute if they want to. So it is a nonsense comparison, it is a separate issue, different people and different countries you are talking about.

The refugees are a moral question , the economic EU migrant issue is really a test of whether you trust capitalism.

I've always strongly believed in personal responsibility as an individual and society. If we are part of the cause for a refugee crisis we have to be part of the solution but that is a separate issue and shouldn't be confused

So you expect the million who've rocked up in Germany to be forever classed as refugees? They would soon gain citizenship.
What is happening is exactly what many of us said should happen in the first place, but were called RWNJ's, for suggesting it.
You have continually championed the cause of completely untrammelled mass immigration as a major benefit to recipient countries,
well, it seems Ginger Ange and her fellow travellers, have finally realised that this nonsense is nothing of the sort, and are arranging for their removal.
If mass immigration was a benefit, I'd have thought the doors would be wedged open permanently.
Yes, EU migrants are a separate issue, and the discussion has centred on freedom of movement, a fine idea when the original 6 countries had similar economies,
a truly ridiculous one when average wages in many Eastern European countries are a fifth of those here.
And I'd sooner trust capitalism than communism.

 

[blueonblue]

Dear monkfish
Divide any number by an increasing amount and the result is less, its not rocket science its basic primary school math, your contention that the flood of financial migrants has no bearing is a nonsense for all to see.

 

[CityStu]

so having more people in employment in the UK paying tax, NI and vat on their purchases is bad for the UK? If you cant understand the issues I would stick to reading

But having more people in who aren't in employment or are at a low pay grade is bad for the UK. Being in the EU enables pretty much unlimited migration of those people.

I am not saying that all immigrants are those drains, but being able to control who comes into the country would enable us to let in people who will contribute and exclude people who won't. That's how it works in other developed nations like Australia and Canada.

That's not even mentioning the impact of simply having more people. England is one of the most densely populated countries in the EU and I personally would rather we didn't have to spread housing and industrial estates out onto this country's beautiful and unique greenfield areas.

 

[urmston]

The EU is planning to spend 3.7 million euros more per year on chauffeurs, a 54% rise in expenditure.

http://www.politico.eu/article/meps...pean-parliament-spending-brussels-strasbourg/

Apparently an EU chauffeur's uniform cost more than 1000 euros.

 

[Manchester_lalala]

Managed to persuade my household to vote for out, also a few fence sitters at work too. Boris should invite me into his team.

 

[big phil]

Apologies if already covered, but what do we reckon to this €6 billion price for Turkey to close the gates? Is this the same deal that Gaddafi offered the EU in 2010 for €2 billion less?

 

[Helmet Cole]

I'd have thought that if you create a single market/currency composed of both very rich and poor countries with free movement of labour and citizens there can only be one outcome? The rich bits will get poorer, and the poor bits richer until they level off. The idea that we can all be winners in the EU 'project' is wishfull thinking. As one of thevricher countries we stand to lose. The poor countries gain.

 

[EalingBlue2]

So you expect the million who've rocked up in Germany to be forever classed as refugees? They would soon gain citizenship.
What is happening is exactly what many of us said should happen in the first place, but were called RWNJ's, for suggesting it.
You have continually championed the cause of completely untrammelled mass immigration as a major benefit to recipient countries,
well, it seems Ginger Ange and her fellow travellers, have finally realised that this nonsense is nothing of the sort, and are arranging for their removal.
If mass immigration was a benefit, I'd have thought the doors would be wedged open permanently.
Yes, EU migrants are a separate issue, and the discussion has centred on freedom of movement, a fine idea when the original 6 countries had similar economies,
a truly ridiculous one when average wages in many Eastern European countries are a fifth of those here.
And I'd sooner trust capitalism than communism.

I have supported the free flow of labour in the EU and despite my centre and sometimes left leanings I have enough respect for capitalism to believe this is overall best for both people and countries

The second issue on Refugees is a different issue , entirely different but....

I believe in responsibility being taken for actions taken as an individual or nation. If we are party to starting wars, bombing countries and destabilising governments elsewhere then we have to take responsibility for the negative after effect as we would take credit for the positives.

If that means refugees fleeing war zones that we are partly responsible for creating then we should be taking proportional responsibility. It was in this case countries like US, France and UK that started the war in Iraq etc not Greece and Germany.

I don't think that means just mass refugees either.

It means trying to minimise and fix the original issues, ie reduce the conflict.
Supporting countries like Jordan far better in dealing nearby with the issues and then ultimately playing our part in resettling refugees

I think it would be a deep moral wrong to destroy a nation and its people for our financial gain and totally screw up an already bad situation and then to walk away leaving other countries to pay for our mess who had far less or no responsibility for the mess

 

[Ancient Citizen]

I have supported the free flow of labour in the EU and despite my centre and sometimes left leanings I have enough respect for capitalism to believe this is overall best for both people and countries

The second issue on Refugees is a different issue , entirely different but....

I believe in responsibility being taken for actions taken as an individual or nation. If we are party to starting wars, bombing countries and destabilising governments elsewhere then we have to take responsibility for the negative after effect as we would take credit for the positives.

If that means refugees fleeing war zones that we are partly responsible for creating then we should be taking proportional responsibility. It was in this case countries like US, France and UK that started the war in Iraq etc not Greece and Germany.

I don't think that means just mass refugees either.

It means trying to minimise and fix the original issues, ie reduce the conflict.
Supporting countries like Jordan far better in dealing nearby with the issues and then ultimately playing our part in resettling refugees

I think it would be a deep moral wrong to destroy a nation and its people for our financial gain and totally screw up an already bad situation and then to walk away leaving other countries to pay for our mess who had far less or no responsibility for the mess

Many thousands of 'refugees' are from countries throughout North Africa, Eritrea, Sudan included. Nobody has bombed these countries.
Many are from Afghanistan, the country where a coalition of over 50 countries worldwide cooperated in removing the Taliban. The EU has now taken a collective
decision to remove these people from it's territory, including Syrians, and they will be returned Turkey, an action considered by many to be akin to ethnic cleansing.
So it appears the EU isn't as compassionate and inclusive as people would have us believe.
The point is, however, is that they are, in the main, fit young men who are, according to your reckoning, very valuable, as mass immigration is beneficial,
irrespective of nationality.
Apparently not.

 

[Ancient Citizen]

I'd have thought that if you create a single market/currency composed of both very rich and poor countries with free movement of labour and citizens there can only be one outcome? The rich bits will get poorer, and the poor bits richer until they level off. The idea that we can all be winners in the EU 'project' is wishfull thinking. As one of thevricher countries we stand to lose. The poor countries gain.

Yes,common sense really, isn't it?