| The Comments |
Best you quit now while you are ahead on ignorance and stupid comments about a post that you didn't or most likely couldn't even read correctly.
No doubt you will answer this, best you make it a good one because I won't be answering you back.
2
Like
|
Ads
Your point can be highlighted by the fact that Spain had Net Emigration in 2015 of 90,000 according to their statistics, many seeking work in UK or Germany.
Dealing with the necessary infrastructure with net immigration of over 300k is a completely different logistical ball game NOT xenophobia.
Once size does definitely not fit all.
0
Like
|
Baz
Best you quit now while you are ahead on ignorance and stupid comments about a post that you didn't or most likely couldn't even read correctly.
No doubt you will answer this, best you make it a good one because I won't be answering you back.
Really? The irony is most delicious. You mention ignorance and stupid comments, so I cant help but ask you; do you need any help with simple words like your and you're?
I wouldnt normally spend time on this, but the context of you attempting to tell someone their post graduate education was wasted, whilst simultaneously coming up with a schoolboy error like this, is, well, pretty unfortunate for you.
Serious question; did you complete high school?
Oh, and by the way, "Skewed crap" isnt a word, its two words.
Please, carry on. Its this, or Benny Hill reruns. And I think you're funnier. Or is that your?
This message was last edited by rob_j1 on 02/11/2016.
1
Like
|
Baz wrote:
Are you saying then the EU, as a whole, is quite prepared to lose upwards of £41.4 billion if the UK did stop, or pull back, (because it will be able to trade with whom it likes) the bulk of trade with the EU, not forgetting these political principals will be thrown out the window, if and when they realise the UK is buying many of the same goods from other countries.
It is not a case of zero trade. That is a ridiculous concept. It will be trade with WTO tariffs around 10% on most goods. Higher on some others. I am quite sure the EU will consider that a fair price to pay for its founding principles. Remember the EU will receive the same tariff charges from UK exports. Since Sterling has been devalued by 18% from the referendum onwards British exporters have the temporary advantage. However the inflationary pressures the British will face in 2018 and beyond will lead to higher interest rates, reduced personal spending and a slowing down of the economy.
I agree tariff imposed trade usually has the effect of alternative markets being sought by countries, so in the long term it’s a negative for the UK. The EU will retain it’s free market access to these alternative markets much easier with existing treaties with 26 EU countries, South Korea, Israel, Mexico,Chile, Algeria, Egypt, Morocco, Norway et al; Then most recently Canada and perhaps TITP one day.
So your statement that the EU needs Britain is simply untrue. The costs of Brexit for Britain are going to be considerable. Maybe it’s a price worth paying for they who swallowed Farage's pifflle that they ‘wanted their country back’.
This message was last edited by Mickyfinn on 02/11/2016.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
Hey Baz
I would really not lose any sleep over rob's comments and you are doing right in not replying to his comments anymore.
If being a post graduate offers a response of 'I am literally pissing myself laughing right now' then you are obviously correct in your observation 'the money was wasted on trying to get you an mba'..', My replies stopped at the point I was called a 'racist' by rob without offering any foundation for this opinion.
I guess we can 'piss ourselves right now' in the knowledge that we will be leaving the EU willingly whilst others will have to go 'kicking and screaming' like a drunken teenager on a Friday night.
2
Like
|
Thanks Hugh man.
Did the 300,000 you refer to include immigration from both EU and non EU countries, or was that just from the EU? I thought that the EU net immigration figures were around 180,000 according to https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/
Having said that there is an excellent video within this website that better explains EU migration to the UK, where it states "Find out more". Also other useful links.
What I'm trying to grasp is if a more flexible arrangement re freedom of movement could be attained to take account of "extenuating circumstances", such as de-stabilising a member state either economically and/ or socially. Or whether this is in effect impossible, which then implies that any member state would have no option but to suffer that de-stabilisation or exit the EU.
What is your opinion re how the UK could better manage its immigration (both from non EU and EU countries)?
Do you conclude that it is impossible for the EU to devise a formula or strategy to better control immigration/emigration where member states become compromised by swift inflows/outflows of people sufficient to compromise their economic and social stabilty?
This message was last edited by ads on 02/11/2016.
0
Like
|
Just because you get something from a reputable place, and then selectively quote or post it, ***doesnt ***make it right. Its skewed crap.
A simple analogy goes like this:
15% of all people involved in road traffic accidents are drunk. The moral to the story? 85% are sober. So lets get all these sober people off the roads, and let drunks drive safely.
Any stat can be misrepresented, and posting the fact that it comes from a reputable origin is just a disingenuous attempt at deception. You and I both know it.
Well now, and I wasn't going to answer back, but since you decided to note one spelling mistake that I made perhaps you would like to check over one post you sent out...I have have underlined the mistake so you can see it clearly.
Serious question; did you complete high school?
No I didn't complete high school because I never went to one, now we know due to my lack of schooling why I made the mistake....Whats your excuse?
And on one other point when I posted what the UK Inland Revenue put out, note they were not my words, I repeated them by posting them, I also added "Some' and 'Could' again your lack of education was proved beyond all doubt because you couldn't read the post correctly.
Serious question; how many 'Boxes' did you have to 'Tick' to obtain your 'Online' mba?
1
Like
|
Al
The reason I went no further with you, is because you had mentioned some anecdotal information, and attempted to pass it off as fact. I posted this already, but you seem to think you're (see Baz, the correct usage of English) entitled to carry on after posting things that are unsubstantiated.
Baz
"Political principals"? Again, for the man who likes to tell others their education is wasted, the word you're looking for there is principles. Please note the difference.
Ads
Onto someone serious. The destabilising you mention is an interesting question. I'd ask you this by way of reply; if you take Spain as an example, with large unemplyment, and particularly amongst the younger folks, is it not better for those unemployed to become economic migrants, and gain meaningful work elsewhere? This way, they not only support themselves, but they often times support their families, by sending money back home. They also help the host nation by filling a job, where the employer would like to expand their business operations.
Economic migration has been around since people had legs. The only difference today seems to be governments putting passports and visas in the way to prevent labour market flexibility.
This message was last edited by rob_j1 on 02/11/2016.
2
Like
|
Really? The irony is most delicious. You mention ignorance and stupid comments, so I cant help but ask you; do you need any help with simple words like your and you're?
I ***wouldnt*** normally spend time on this, but the context of you attempting to tell someone their post graduate education was wasted, whilst simultaneously coming up with a schoolboy error like this, is, well, pretty unfortunate for you.
Serious question; did you complete high school?
Oh, and by the way, "Skewed crap" ***isnt ***a word, its two words.
Please, carry on. Its this, or Benny Hill reruns. And I think you're funnier. Or is that your?
Hi rob.
Underlined another couple of spelling mistakes your high class education came up with.
PS.
Any chance you could get a refund on the Internet Course you paid for? As it's not helping you much.
2
Like
|
Baz
Theres a difference between being lazy, and knowing how to spell.
0
Like
|
Well you score on both points then.
Lazy...Because you don't bother to read a post correctly....And
Knowing how to spell....Well you can't.
By rob.
1
Like
|
It is obvious that some posters on this forum are principally interested in making personal attacks on other members rather than the subject matter. There is no purpose served by it.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
2
Like
|
Micky,
You can be anything that you wish to be on a forum, some posters make George Soros and Richard Branson look like idiots, they know everything about everything, that's why many of them live in concrete boxes on inland Spanish complexes. 
_______________________
IF YOU WISH TO QUOTE ANY OF MY POSTS PLEASE DO SO IN THEIR ENTIRETY AND NOT JUST A FEW SELECTED WORDS TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT.
THANK YOU.
2
Like
|
Rob-j1
I agree that it is good for those geuninely seeking work and study to have that opportunity to do so, but where this occurs on such a scale to be non economic for the recipient nation (i.e. where in work benefits that many are using are not economically viable for the host nation), should that nation have the right to limit those in-work benefits to their own nationals (devised as a long term strategy to encourage nationals back into work) or would this be perceived as discriminatory by the EU? At present are UK nationals in effect subsidising the in-work benefits of many migrants?
Also at what point do you consider that the proliferation of intolerance brought about by swift unplanned movements that cause knock on effects on infrastructure/housing/education/health etc, needs to be acknowledged and a workable strategy devised to deal with this across member states, so as not to undermine the EU original principles to promote cohesion tolerance and integration?
This message was last edited by ads on 02/11/2016.
0
Like
|
Sorry Ads my quoted figures were overall movements to compare, not just EU numbers.
I have read with interest why the porpoises Australian points system may not be so good for us but no doubt it will be difficult to prevent movement of people.
1. For economic reasons whilst we still have poor countries therefore cheap labour
2. For asylum reasons, fleeing genuine persecution of fleeing for your life.
The second problem will be with us for a long time and I have no idea how you could resolve this as humanitarian reasons suggest a number of families need help. But I note most come West rather than North to Russia or East to Arab speaking nations.
As for no. 1, there appears to be a general opinion that economic migrants come and work in the UK and add to the economy, whilst this has some validity, it stands to reason that at any given moment, the number of jobs available is finite, therefore, as with all supply and demand economics, price for labour is kept low and governments have to keep increasing minimum wages or welfare benefits to prevent poverty, thus increasing its borrowings.
i think the principle of Freedom of Movement to work has been long forgotten and perhaps in our generosity to try and prevent poverty in the UK many migrants have cottoned on to our generous nature.
Certain Americans are trying to squash the idea of Welfare as its regarded as an easy ride, like with most things, there has to be middle ground and controlled immigration, however you do it has to be the start so we can better estimate school places, housing needs, NHS beds etc. Etc.
2
Like
|
I agree with you Hugh man. We need controls.
I was just drafting up the following reply to Rob-j1so I might as well include it here.
Where you state they will be filling a job in the recipient nation which assist businesses to expand, how do you rationalise this with the instances where migrant citizens become proportionately better off due to increased minimum wage and in- work benefits (due to member state diferrentials), and send large proportions of their earnings home thereby depleting the benefit to the recipient member state in taxes from spending, and this together with under supply of housing leads to increases in rents for nationals, plus the extra Govt resources required to cater for additional educational and health provision, where zero hours contracts and partime work have proliferated with all the economic consequences etc.
Isn't the reality that this does not benefit citizens of that state since only the businesses benefit from increased profit margins, and the real effect on the citizens reflects a downturn in their immediate infrastructures, social structures, and living standards? Do you not see the need for a review of controls and strategies when swift and unplanned migration reaches an unsustainable level, where the host country economically cannot continue to support migration on such a large scale without suffering the consequences of (understandable) citizen unrest? By this I am referring to economic migrants and not refugees.
This message was last edited by ads on 02/11/2016.
This message was last edited by ads on 02/11/2016.
1
Like
|
Brexit was an anti establishment vote, very similar to Donald Trump's surge in the polls, the American electorate aren't particularly great Trump supporters, more anti Clinton/Obama establishment voters. Many of us have been taking the mickey out of the EU establishment from as far back as Jim Hacker's euro sausage, but they are either too dense or too arrogant to notice.
As Abraham Lincoln famously said, 'You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time'.
_______________________
IF YOU WISH TO QUOTE ANY OF MY POSTS PLEASE DO SO IN THEIR ENTIRETY AND NOT JUST A FEW SELECTED WORDS TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT.
THANK YOU.
2
Like
|
Ads;
Migration of workers benefits business as well as the migrants themselves. They bring new skills work for less drive down wage costs and develop trades and industry. Business then grows, pay more tax and NI. Investors invest and enjoy higher dividends and pensions funds benefit from higher returns providing better pensions. It's called the capitalist cycle. What do you advocate a Commintern demand economy?
It's an accepted phenomenon in this age that Britain and EU states need migrant workers because their welfare state is too generous to the indigenous population, There are too many people content to do nothing there is little political will to change that and most countries have a large ageing population
It is the responsibility of sovereign governments to provide sufficient acceptable services to an expanding population. The EU has no influence on that. It’s thought there are 3 million EU migrants living and working in Britain out of an existing population of 65 million. There is a population growth rate of 0.63% well within the capabilities of current strategic planning of public services.
It’s in the interests of some politicians and media to allege migration from the EU is a problem for Britain. My view is that it’s far from a problem and without it GDP would fall. Pandering to populisim may seem an attractive idea to those who are bored or feel hard done to by the system. It’s always easier to blame someone else for your own shortcomings and that is what is driving the likes of Trump and Farage to political success. Be careful what you wish for applies here.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
Micky
The welfare system is too generous and the people dont want to work in more menial tasks.
That is the reason the EU countries should allow unlimited migration, to offset these issues with indigenous peoples.
Is that the overall point your making here?
_______________________
Best wishes, Brian
0
Like
|
No that's just one of the causes and the need for workers from EU partenship states where the welfare state is less generous to find a decent standard of living. There are political reasons why migration from the EU is desirable. It assists integration, education and understanding between the peoples of Europe who share a common culture, religion and social values. It helps to reduce the rise of nationalism which history shows us is a common cause of conflict.
Remember I'm not confusing migration from the EU with immigrants or refugees from the rest of the world. That is an entirely different and seperate problem.
The Pros and cons of migrant workers in Britain. If you are fair minded decide what is best for Britain.
Positive
Job vacancies and skills gaps can be filled.
Economic growth can be sustained.
Services to an ageing population can be maintained when there are insufficient young people locally.
The pension gap can be filled by the contributions of new young workers and they also pay taxes.
Immigrants bring energy and innovation.
Host countries are enriched by cultural diversity.
Failing schools (and those with falling numbers) can be transformed.
Negative
Depression of wages may occur but this seems to be temporary.
Having workers willing to work for relatively low pay may allow employers to ignore productivity, training and innovation.
Migrants may be exploited.
Increases in population can put pressure on public services.
Unemployment may rise if there are unrestricted numbers of incomers.
There may be integration difficulties and friction with local people.
Large movements of people lead to more security monitoring.
Ease of movement may facilitate organised crime and people trafficking.
This message was last edited by Mickyfinn on 02/11/2016.
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
0
Like
|