EU referendum

[CityStu]

I hear what people are saying with regard to this but (and correct me if wrong) there doesn't seem to be much argument on the fact that these extra people are putting more into the economy than taking out. Isn't problem the government's failure to reinvest that money into public services?

To go with your analogy of being within a firm. I see it more like, imagine you worked at a desk for a company but eventually you realised you had nobody to clean the bogs, or order the stationery or fix the machines. So you get some more staff in to do that and the company becomes more productive but now the canteen is now longer big enough, and there aren't enough toilets or car parking spaces for everyone. So you ask the boss if he could maybe do something about that using some of this extra profit but unfortunately he can't because he's already spent it on a new Ferrari and also new Ferraris for all of his friends.

Like I say, I don't believe immigration will change anyway and nobody has addressed the point as to why we accept more people from outside EU. It seems crazy to me that it's the one issue that will decide it for many people when they will notice very little change.

What are you basing your fact that EU migrants are net contributors on? Any analysis I've seen is based on the reported figure of about 300k coming in, when the number of NI numbers issued is 2 or 3 times that amount. Yes, some may be here temporarily (less than a year), but in that time they still use roads, schools, hospitals, power, etc.

 

[Bigga]

This morning my wife asked me if I'm voting.

"No", I said "Very little will change either way".

Then, this morning Georgie Porgie pops up with he 'will have to raise taxes and cut funding'!

I laughed out and said

"See! Very little will change!"!!

 

[Cheadle_hulmeBlue]

where do you live cheadle hulme blue?

most of the time I'm at my dads, which is the estate opposite the cross keys pub. I'm right on the border of adswood/bridgehall.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

Some good points here, Tim. Many employers just want to pluck people off trees, rather than train them, if they can get away with it. And if foreign, more compliant labour is available, then so much the better. Employers don't pick up the consequences of strained infrastructure. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about all employers here but enough to make a difference.

However the public sector is equally culpable in its own way. It seems incapable of forecasting workforce requirements a few years ahead and then setting out its stall to train successors. The NHS is a prime example.

The truth is, governments of all hues are good talkers and piss poor managers with little commercial experience.

Thanks sir Baconface.

It is the Public Sector where I have encountered these problems most.

When I go round and meet the people in charge of workforce planning in hospitals etc I do sometimes let them know they are letting down their local communities if they are not growing their own workforces. Half of patient contact in the Health Service is from support workers and the better Hospitals, care services etc have programmes to grow their own staff!

 

[Blue Til Death]

Now the desperate Osbourne threatens tax rises and more cuts if we don't do what he wants, I'm glad he has to be honest as that alone has signed his and Cameron's political death warrants...!
The Brexit Tories would block the proposal but the damage has been done and probably alienated the Labour support for remaining..!

 

[Credo]

The President of the USA thinks we should remain!

That is because nobody asked him what would he do if the border between Mexico and the USA was controlled by officials in Canada?

 

[BigJoe#1]

I hear what people are saying with regard to this but (and correct me if wrong) there doesn't seem to be much argument on the fact that these extra people are putting more into the economy than taking out. Isn't problem the government's failure to reinvest that money into public services?

To go with your analogy of being within a firm. I see it more like, imagine you worked at a desk for a company but eventually you realised you had nobody to clean the bogs, or order the stationery or fix the machines. So you get some more staff in to do that and the company becomes more productive but now the canteen is now longer big enough, and there aren't enough toilets or car parking spaces for everyone. So you ask the boss if he could maybe do something about that using some of this extra profit but unfortunately he can't because he's already spent it on a new Ferrari and also new Ferraris for all of his friends.

Like I say, I don't believe immigration will change anyway and nobody has addressed the point as to why we accept more people from outside EU. It seems crazy to me that it's the one issue that will decide it for many people when they will notice very little change.

Geoff, to your final point. We don't accept more from outside the EU than inside. 330,000 come here every year (nett) 180,000 from the EU, 150,000 from outside. The outside the EU number are generally selected (necessary) skills or paying students. With the exception of refugees they need, qualification, desired skills and to be self financing. The 180,000from within the EU just rock up, some take social housing and claim benefits, others take unskilled work and some opportunities are denied to some Brits.

Your point does raise the thought though about nett and gross immigration. If we are a nett grow rug, what is the gross figure? Would it be correct to assume the number of Brits that leave the UK would counter acted by a straight number if EU migrants, I will check but I suspect strongly thus the case!

 

[mcfc1632]

the deciding factor in the poll will be the millions who are royally pissed off with politics in general, politicians in particular. There has been a 'disconnect' between Westminster and large parts of the electorate for many years, "they are all as bad as each other " is often heard, so in the current climate, people who would not normally vote could be swayed to by a single issue, which is immigration.
It is an open goal for the 'outers', whose backers in the press have been campaigning against the EU for years, with lurid headlines about terrorists walking into Britain, immigrants stealing jobs, being given preference for social housing etc. Sadly there is no platform for the remain camp to dispute the issue, the press is overwhelmingly right-wing brexit. Some of the comments on this thread illustrate how successful this propaganda has been.
What-ever happens, the country needs to ditch the obsolete FPTP election process that has propped up the bubble of Westminster with it's gravy train mentality, unelected second house, safe-seats etc.

I think that it is a bit 'easy' for the Remain view to simply label all Leavers as being swayed by immigration. Yes, it is a major concern for me, but well behind my concern for where the EU is headed and the way we are just aimlessly being tugged along with seemingly no control or influence.

The remain campaign keep banging on about how we should be 'in there and influencing' but we do not seem to hold any sway/have any impact on the relentless drive of the EU to federalism. Remain states that it is so bad to leave - surely being in as an impotent player going in a direction you do not want is far worse?

 

[steviemc]

Here are a few who strongly believe the UK should remain a member of the EU:

• Governor of the Bank of England
• International Monetary Fund
• Institute for Fiscal Studies
• Confederation of British Industry
• Leaders/heads of state of every single other member of the EU
• President of the United States of America
• Eight former US Treasury Secretaries
• President of China
• Prime Minister of India
• Prime Minister of Canada
• Prime Minister of Australia
• Prime Minister of Japan
• Prime Minister of New Zealand
• The chief executives of most of the top 100 companies in the UK including Marks and Spencer, BT, Asda, Vodafone, Virgin, IBM, BMW etc.
• Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations
• All living former Prime Ministers of the UK (from both parties)
• Virtually all reputable and recognised economists
• The Prime Minister of the UK
• The leader of the Labour Party
• The Leader of the Liberal Democrats
• The Leader of the Green Party
• The Leader of the Scottish National Party
• The leader of Plaid Cymru
• Leader of Sinn Fein
• Martin Lewis, that money saving dude off the telly
• The Secretary General of the TUC
• Unison
• National Union of Students
• National Union of Farmers
• Stephen Hawking
• Chief Executive of the NHS
• 300 of the most prominent international historians
• Director of Europol
• David Anderson QC, Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation
• Former Directors of GCHQ
• Secretary General of Nato
• Church of England
• Church in Scotland
• Church in Wales
• Friends of the Earth
• Greenpeace
• Director General of the World Trade Organisation
• WWF
• World Bank
• OECD

And a few that think we should leave
- Boris Johnson
- Ian Ducan Smith
- Michael Gove
- Donald Trump
- UKIP
- Britain First
- The Sun

You see! You've just exemplified in one post the overwhelming reason why people distrust those suggesting we remain in the EU. The blatant way you use the term 'a few' yet provide a representation totaling 45 for the list that suits your agenda, whilst only providing a comparative total of 7 for the list that doesn't suit your agenda.

You also slant the suggested list to suit your purpose with the line 'who strongly believe' for the first section whilst forgetting to include 'who strongly believe' for the second section. Needing to skew the narrative in such a way suggests to me that you don't 'entirely' believe in what you're promoting.

 

[mcfc1632]

I've said many times immigration needs to be addressed so here are some ideas!
- stop bombing the Middle East
- don't always play by the letter of the law. The French don't when they dismantle camps etc.
- create more jobs for local people through better skills and career paths
- implement the restrictions on unemployment and family allowances.
- stop multi-language public service advice (except for genuine refugees).
- build allies within the EU on sustainable solutions!
- tighten the tax laws so rich Russians, French pay tax on property bought and sold!

Problem is that none of those points are anything that the 'man in the street' would feel that they can affect - what they can affect is the position of the UK in the EU.

There is a tide flowing in the direction of Leave and the Remain tactic of bullying/scaring/patronising is not stemming it. The betting is down to 7/4 now with a week to go - was over 4/1 a couple of weeks ago and has gradually shifted.

 

[sir baconface]

The remain campaign keep banging on about how we should be 'in there and influencing' but we do not seem to hold any sway/have any impact on the relentless drive of the EU to federalism. Remain states that it is so bad to leave - surely being in as an impotent player going in a direction you do not want is far worse?

Correct. Hardly any Remainians subscribe to the centrepiece EU policies of integration, monetary union, open borders, etc. Therefore the UK wouldn't be a member of the "inner circle" that drives such strategies. If they think that will give us huge influence, I beg to differ. Repeatedly playing the veto card to thwart Germany and France seems the best we can hope for.

I'd rather accept the risks of rebuilding outside the EU than settle for such a mind-numbingly negative case for staying.

 

[Millwallawayveteran1988]

Do you work in an office and have a desk? If so, your employer will presumably have enough desks and office space for all employees. Now suppose the firm takes on loads more people but doesn't increase the amount of office space or desks. Then there aren't sufficient resources to go round and if you don't get in early enough, you can't do your job. With free movement of labour, people are going to move to countries where wages are higher and where there are jobs. But public resources like medical services and schools are finite. That's the problem.

I've no problem with immigration per se and, for me, it's not the key issue but it has to be manageable and take into account pressure on scarce resources.

I see the argument but this is something that our government could do something about if we had the desire. The Tories are making horrendous cutbacks to services on the back of "silly old labour" spent too much while still feathering their traditional voters nests. I regularly see clients who have pensions of more than £3000 per month. They get free bus passes, free tube if live in London, £200 a year towards their heating. Why? They don't need it. They could pay for it but they are not going to turn it down. It's wasteful but politically damaging to change it to only be given to those that do need it. Inhitance tax thresholds are being raised with this new residence relief. Why? This just encourages older people to hord more cash which believe me they are very good at (rainy day mentality) rather than spend some to boost the economy or hand it to their kids early.

I can see both sides to the argument but I think it's risky leaving.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Here are a few who strongly believe the UK should remain a member of the EU:

• Martin Lewis, that money saving dude off the telly

I read Lewis's article as it happens. It's actually one of the best I've read and sets out both sides of the argument very carefully. He also made it clear that there were no facts on either side just opinions.

So it was a neutral article although he just favours Remain as he felt there was less risk financially. But he was quoted as advocating a Stay vote on a Stronger In leaflet which he was a bit annoyed about. He made the point that what swayed him would not necessarily sway anyone else.

 

[Pino]

Why is it Government policy for Turkey to join the EU and why are we paying £169.5million per year in pre-accession assistance to Turkey?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

You see! You've just exemplified in one post the overwhelming reason why people distrust those suggesting we remain in the EU. The blatant way you use the term 'a few' yet provide a representation totaling 45 for the list that suits your agenda, whilst only providing a comparative total of 7 for the list that doesn't suit your agenda.

You also slant the suggested list to suit your purpose with the line 'who strongly believe' for the first section whilst forgetting to include 'who strongly believe' for the second section. Needing to skew the narrative in such a way suggests to me that you don't 'entirely' believe in what you're promoting.

I'm pretty certain he was going for humour with his 'Leave' list being so short and the names he chose.

 

[Citizen of Legoland]

I read Lewis's article as it happens. It's actually one of the best I've read and sets out both sides of the argument very carefully. He also made it clear that there were no facts on either side just opinions.

So it was a neutral article although he just favours Remain as he felt there was less risk financially. But he was quoted as advocating a Stay vote on a Stronger In leaflet which he was a bit annoyed about. He made the point that what swayed him would not necessarily sway anyone else.

He's popped up a couple of times and spoke a lot of sense. He admitted to being risk averse, hence his decision to vote remain, otherwise he probably would have gone the other way, I feel.

 

[inchy14]

If Osbournes prediction this morning is so true, why the fuck has he decided to leave it until the last minute to tell us? Surely he knew when Cameron announced there would be a referendum what effect it may have on the country and should have drawn up plans then to sort any deficit out.

It's all bollocks, this fucker hasn't got a single thing right since he became C.O.E. and should have been sacked from his post along time ago, the farce around benefit cuts in his last budget which was overturned should have seen to that.

More scare mongering and why they haven't realised it's pushing the undecided voter towards out i can't quite fathom out.

 

[TRUE BLUE NO1]

You see! You've just exemplified in one post the overwhelming reason why people distrust those suggesting we remain in the EU. The blatant way you use the term 'a few' yet provide a representation totaling 45 for the list that suits your agenda, whilst only providing a comparative total of 7 for the list that doesn't suit your agenda.

You also slant the suggested list to suit your purpose with the line 'who strongly believe' for the first section whilst forgetting to include 'who strongly believe' for the second section. Needing to skew the narrative in such a way suggests to me that you don't 'entirely' believe in what you're promoting.

Could have included 88% of 600 independent economists think "stay" is better for the country as well mate, so I think this list was well balanced!;)

Seriously tho....putting joking aside, I've switched off to a lot of "leavers" comments for the very same reason, so it does work both ways...No one knows what is going to happen either way, so for outs to imply they know more than alot of the experts, seems very strange.....If we all kept to a "I disagree and provide proof/analysis of why they feel that way" we are all likely to listen to what people have to say. For any of us to discredit/belittle people's posts isnt helpful for anyone..

 

[Credo]

An interesting read.


Cadbury moved factory to Poland 2011 with EU grant.
Ford Transit moved to Turkey 2013 with EU grant.
Jaguar Land Rover has recently agreed to build a new plant in Slovakia with EU grant, owned by Tata, the same company who have trashed our steel works and emptied the workers pension funds.
Peugeot closed its Ryton (was Rootes Group) plant and moved production to Slovakia with EU grant.
British Army's new Ajax fighting vehicles to be built in SPAIN using SWEDISH steel at the request of the EU to support jobs in Spain with EU grant, rather than Wales.
Dyson gone to Malaysia, with an EU loan.
Crown Closures, Bournemouth (Was METAL BOX), gone to Poland with EU grant, once employed 1,200.
M&S manufacturing gone to far east with EU loan.
Hornby models gone. In fact all toys and models now gone from UK along with the patents all with with EU grants.
Gillette gone to eastern Europe with EU grant.
Texas Instruments Greenock gone to Germany with EU grant.
Indesit at Bodelwyddan Wales gone with EU grant.
Sekisui Alveo said production at its Merthyr Tydfil Industrial Park foam plant will relocate production to Roermond in the Netherlands, with EU funding.
Hoover Merthyr factory moved out of UK to Czech Republic and the Far East by Italian company Candy with EU backing.
ICI integration into Holland’s AkzoNobel with EU bank loan and within days of the merger, several factories in the UK, were closed, eliminating 3,500 jobs
Boots sold to Italians Stefano Pessina who have based their HQ in Switzerland to avoid tax to the tune of £80 million a year, using an EU loan for the purchase.
JDS Uniphase run by two Dutch men, bought up companies in the UK with £20 million in EU 'regeneration' grants, created a pollution nightmare and just closed it all down leaving 1,200 out of work and an environmental clean-up paid for by the UK tax-payer. They also raided the pension fund and drained it dry.
UK airports are owned by a Spanish company.
Scottish Power is owned by a Spanish company.
Most London buses are run by Spanish and German companies.
The Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to be built by French company EDF, part owned by the French government, using cheap Chinese steel that has catastrophically failed in other nuclear installations. Now EDF say the costs will be double or more and it will be very late even if it does come online.
Swindon was once our producer of rail locomotives and rolling stock. Not any more, it's Bombardier in Derby and due to their losses in the aviation market, that could see the end of the British railways manufacturing altogether even though Bombardier had EU grants to keep Derby going which they diverted to their loss-making aviation side in Canada.
39% of British invention patents have been passed to foreign companies, many of them in the EU
The Mini cars that Cameron stood in front of as an example of British engineering, are built by BMW mostly in Holland and Austria. His campaign bus was made in Germany even though we have Plaxton, Optare, Bluebird, Dennis etc., in the UK. The bicycle for the Greens was made in the far east, not by Raleigh UK but then they are probably going to move to the Netherlands too as they have said recently.

Anyone who thinks the EU is good for British industry or any other business simply hasn't paid attention to what has been systematically asset-stripped from the UK. Name me one major technology company still running in the UK, I used to contract out to many, then the work just dried up as they were sold off to companies from France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, etc., and now we don't even teach electronic technology for technicians any more, due to EU regulations.

I haven't detailed our non-existent fishing industry the EU paid to destroy, nor the farmers being paid NOT to produce food they could sell for more than they get paid to do nothing, don't even go there.
I haven't mentioned what it costs us to be asset-stripped like this, nor have I mentioned immigration, nor the risk to our security if control of our armed forces is passed to Brussels or Germany.

Find something that's gone the other way, I've looked and I just can't. If you think the EU is a good idea,
1/ You haven't read the party manifesto of The European Peoples' Party.
2/ You haven't had to deal with EU petty bureaucracy tearing your business down.
3/ You don't think it matters.

 

[TRUE BLUE NO1]

I read Lewis's article as it happens. It's actually one of the best I've read and sets out both sides of the argument very carefully. He also made it clear that there were no facts on either side just opinions.

So it was a neutral article although he just favours Remain as he felt there was less risk financially. But he was quoted as advocating a Stay vote on a Stronger In leaflet which he was a bit annoyed about. He made the point that what swayed him would not necessarily sway anyone else.

Thanks for commenting on what he said mate...I saw his name on the list posted but hadnt seen his report....I think many in the financial sector are less likely to take "risk" as they see the impact uncertainty causes on the economy...cheers