| The Comments |
Earlier this year, pre 23rd June (Armagedon day), I was kicked off this forum because people did not like hearing the truth (as far as I was able to express it). Certain Forum members were talking uninformed rubbish then and they still continue to do so!!
So unfortunately, the knowledgeable comments are still ignored, and decried, for all the wrong reasons. I have not been following the content of the forum over those tragic months since being removed, but I have read the very recent items. Why is everyone that contributes, wasting their time on repeating the same old arguments? The bigoted leavers will never accept the, very obvious, correct reasoning of the remainers (whether, or not, their reasoning is put succinctly or clumsily).
It is so obvious that the majority of leavers are ignorant in the extreem (and, of course,even some remainers who can be forgiven), but who, in/from/of the UK, is capable of expressing themselves in terms of true knowledge? This is especially so in this awful period of, not just uncertainty, but sheer impotence imposed by a very insecure leader of Parliament.
I know that, immediately I post this diatribe, I shall, once again, be banned from the forum - no great problem, I had hoped to see a mass of common-sense in place of all the earlier drivel, so leave disenheartened and very unhappy about the future of my homeland, lowly paid, low interlect and low achieving, UK.
Goodbye again.
1
Like
|
Tadd
What a state we are in I wonder how many will react to Scottish migrants when Scotland leave the UK and stay in EU.
Very unlikely that Scotland will leave the UK and zero chance of them being part of the EU, and why would anyone who voted (if they had the chance) to leave the UK then become a migrant to the UK?
Why can't we all live together and my wish is an EU with the same freedom as the 4 state union of the UK instead if this elitenesss and arrogant attitude.
It's a big world, we can't all live in the UK and be happy ever after, we must be able to accomodate everyone financially. You surely cannot be saying if you can't find work in your own country why not come to the UK we will carry the burden?
Yes we have a long way to go but as I have said before we want peace and harmony across the globe one day it might happen when the human race grows up a bit.
Please make your financial case for us to take on board everyone that wants to come to the UK, I really don't see the problem with making sure the UK takes no backward steps with any influx of immigrants.
You say when asked you don't want 'uncontrolled immigration', but your threads would suggest otherwise. I think you are being very naive about the implications of anything but 'controlled migration'.
0
Like
|
Hey Wasin, you don't sit on the fence, do you?
0
Like
|
BigAl
I disagree there is a very strong chance that Scotland will leave the UK
What about borders between NI & Eire?
If we rid the world of violence, war, persecution greed and selfishnsess people would not have to come to the UK and if we should target equality for every human being in teh world for work, housing, education and health care across the globe and if we start with the EU we can do it as I have said many times before 3 steps forward and 2 steps back is progress
IMO Brexit is truly a backward step and the attitude by many towards their fellow human beings is a travesty in itself
No mattre which way you look at it migration is a problem for the world and it has NOTHING to do with the EU and it is not teh EU's fault I repeat Brexit will NOT change anything
If we spent more effort in fixin the problem rather than a negative arrogant selfish attitude we can find a solution but we need to work together and devolution is NOT the answer
Yes a dream but many dreams have come true - have we learnt nothing
What next migrant segregation
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
1
Like
|
BigAl2015
I saw your points regarding (paraphrased)
1. "how much immigration is the right number" and
2. "natural cause (sp?) of events."
Lets get right to the point:
1. Unemployment is 4.9%. These are the official stats from the government. I could posed a ridiculous point, but only to make the point; we could have an extra 20 million people in the country. As long as they worked, were productive, paid taxes, and assisted the country to grow (GDP), then I wouldnt care. Why? Because the tax receipts accrued should be used to pay for essential services like hospitals, etc.
The flip side to the argument is also that if we lost 20 million people, there would be less tax receipts, but also less requirement for services.
In a nutshell, as long as people are productive, I dont care what the number of people in the country happens to be. The unemployment figure alone tells me everything I need to know. In short, we are doing well (5th biggest economy in the world, 4.9% unemployment), and business is screaming out for more people, in order to make the country grow. With such low unemployment, business needs to engage in a bidding war to attract staff, which causes inflation. Point of fact, unemployment is getting uncomfortably low, becaue if it gets much lower, wages inflation will spill into other areas.
As such, population growth numbers should be viewed in context with employment (currently at record levels - have you checked this for yourself???).
There is another argument I have made repeatedly, which is the greying of the population. Everyone that is saying "too many immigrants" has repeatedly refused to speak about this issue, burying their heads in the sand. Why? Why would people, who KNOW we have a massive problem with demographics, actually sit there and ignore the solution staring them right in the face (immigrants), other than to cut off their own noses to spite their faces? THIS is the intransigence bordering on stupidity.
2. The natural course of events. Are you aware of how many industrial revolutions there have been? I previously made reference to the point about the typing pool disappearing due to new disruptive technology (the photocopier), and how this led to the demise of a great many jobs. NO ONE today cares about the loss of the pool typist. This type of disruption occurs every day with new technology. One of the core points as well, is that these resources become free to work in other sectors of the economy, ultimately allowing greater GDP.
Ask yourself how many times you've heard the expression "How did we do this before the internet." Ironically, we are able to have this very discussion as a direct consequence of disruptive technology...
I fear the argument fundamentally boils down to "social cohesion" (aka racism). Tell me I'm wrong, but back it up with stats, not anecdotes.
1
Like
|
Rob & Tadd
We all have different views, my view is that 'uncontrolled immigration' will be the demise of the UK, whereas 'controlled immigration' could be the making of the UK.
So you can see that I agree where your points touch on the 'controlled immigration' option, the 'uncontrolled immigration' which I believe you are both advocating is the part where we will never agree.
Rob
Shame on you trying to make this about 'racism', this is where your argument let's you down.
0
Like
|
These comments below dont address my questions and at best unconvinicing, can you perhaps address my points please?
ADS. The example you keep using is the needs of our country without considering consequences for the country the people leave. I am saying we should not just take migrants from other countries on economic grounds, it starves the other country of their 'brains and talent', which is selfish and stores up problems for later.
Big Al: What makes someone financially secure, particularly at retirement age? How do you know they arnt going to get stuck in some property nightmare and lose all they have? Why should someone who has money now, be allowed in to a country as though they will always have money available?
I suppose my argument here is that a 'blanket' free movement is not working and a solely financial test is also not something that is guaranteed to work.
If all member states were party to discussions about the people who they can 'spare' and the people they 'want' it may be a more realistic excercise all round?
ADS: So long as there is an inequality of earning power across member states there will always be a "magnetic" draw to the state that provides the higher earning capacity, especially in times of high unemployment, and so long as this is kept in check ( through controls to identify both the country's need and ability to adequately accommodate ) there should be no problem. The trouble is that there appears no such flexibility at present to allow these controls within the current EU system of free movement.
Big Al: We have to take account of people from other countries that may want to retire to the UK, just as some of us may want to retire to say Spain.
If this movement of people does not negatively impact the recipient country financially then I cannot see a problem.
My problem with 'uncontrolled migration' is the financial burden we are storing up for the future.
_______________________
Best wishes, Brian
0
Like
|
BigAl2015
Rob & Tadd
We all have different views, my view is that 'uncontrolled immigration' will be the demise of the UK, whereas 'controlled immigration' could be the making of the UK.
So you can see that I agree where your points touch on the 'controlled immigration' option, the 'uncontrolled immigration' which I believe you are both advocating is the part where we will never agree.
Rob
Shame on you trying to make this about 'racism', this is where your argument let's you down.
I have made my points, and backed them up with government statistics.
Shame on you sir, for perpetuating populist rubbish, without even a speck of evidence to back up your specious claims.
0
Like
|
|
Briando,
I think there has been some misunderstanding here as I have repeatedly stressed the unfairness and impact on countries losing their labour force... No way do I suggest that the UK should take labour from another member state which is one of the criticisms I have about the current EU's freedom of movement policy. It acts as a magnet when unemployment levels are high and earning capacities are so out of kilter with one another. The EU should examine this and make provision for strategies to tackle unemployment and in the interim provide flexibility for EU member states to have greater controls when required, both on the input and output of their labour forces. A balance should be restored..... But the EU appear totally intransigent in this regard which has been of constant frustration to many.
This message was last edited by ads on 28/10/2016.
0
Like
|
Rob
You made a point / remark about 'racism', please tell me what you backed this up with?
0
Like
|
I think this thread has run its course as we are going around in circles and quite frankly nobody knows what is going to happen
All this guesswork and rumours are irrelevant at this point
Nothing worse than uncertainty
_______________________
“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge”
0
Like
|
Tony Blair has urged remain voters to organise their opposition to Brexit, telling them: “We are the insurgents now.”
The former prime minister also called on Theresa May to keep all her options open on the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, including the possibility of staying in the union if public opinion shifts. It marks his first major intervention on Brexit since the referendum campaign.
Blair’s argument contrasts with that of May, who also backed remain during the campaign, but has now said anyone who does not accept the referendum result is trying to frustrate the will of the British people.
Writing in the New European, Blair called for a new movement born from the 48% of voters who wanted to remain in the EU, saying: “We’re the insurgents now. We have to build the capability to mobilise and to organise.”
_______________________
Time is the school in which we learn
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Delmore Schwartz.
1
Like
|
I can clearly remember the last time blair had the 'Capability' 'Mobility' and to 'Organise'
The countries are still paying the price of his wisdom.
5
Like
|
Briando,
There is also the aspect of EU criminality to consider in terms of freedom of movement and the impact on the UK, as we have experienced an increase in the region of 240% on intake of EU criminals into our prisons....whilst the instances have diminished in the member states from where they originated.
This is now having to be addressed by the UK Govt but I would ask the outstanding general question, when migrant workers no longer have work in the UK do we have an adequate system in place to request their return, or do those with criminal intent remain and look to criminal activity to sustain their stay, hence the sudden large increase in EU prison inmates?
So many knock on effects and the need for controls...Germany also appears to be struggling in this regard.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/659620/Britain-prison-huge-rise-EU-convicts-150million-taxpayer
Another question, has the European Court of Justice now impeded the ability to repatriate criminals or can the UK apply a change in legislation to overcome this aspect?
Tadd,
It's important to identify compromising issues relating to the freedom of movement and their impact on both recipient member states and those from where they came if we are ever to have an honest debate and remain aware of the realities, no matter how uncomfortable. To close down debate will not help educate or assist in finding mutually agreeable solutions.
This message was last edited by ads on 28/10/2016.
1
Like
|
Tony Blair said so, that's good enough for me. Which way is Iraq?
1
Like
|
Ads
Briando,
I think there has been some misunderstanding here as I have repeatedly stressed the unfairness and impact on countries losing their labour force... No way do I suggest that the UK should take labour from another member state which is one of the criticisms I have about the current EU's freedom of movement policy. It acts as a magnet when unemployment levels are high and earning capacities are so out of kilter with one another. The EU should examine this and make provision for strategies to tackle unemployment and in the interim provide flexibility for EU member states to have greater controls when required, both on the input and output of their labour forces. A balance should be restored..... But the EU appear totally intransigent in this regard which has been of constant frustration to many.
I noticed you used the words that we have TAKEN labour from another member state. In the strictest sense of the English language, theres an underlying implication is what you've written, along the lines that we've imposed our will upon them, almost to the point of kidnapping.
Perhaps the language used should have been different? The people you speak of are often economic migrants, not unlike people who move from rural England into London, to chase work and opportunity.
One of the points you seem to skip over, are the points of individual choice. Do you really believe that such freedom of movement should be curtailed? We dont live in communist Russia, thank goodness. How would you like Mrs May telling you where you can or cant go?
You then seem to think that because people are free, and cant exercise their freedom to move and chase their dreams, that this somehow represents intransigence on the part of the EU?
How bizarre.
BigAl2015
I wrote a great many things, and have repeatedly provided stats, in order to make my position crystal clear. You refuse to engage any of the many points, and yet react only to one specific point that serves your purpose.
What have you provided by way of evidence to back up ANY claim you make? Or are you just a one hit wonder that follows the crowd?
This message was last edited by rob_j1 on 28/10/2016.
1
Like
|
Rob, you wrote:
BigAl2015
I wrote a great many things, and have repeatedly provided stats, in order to make my position crystal clear. You refuse to engage any of the many points, and yet react only to one specific point that serves your purpose.
There is little point in me engaging in any of the points,because when people engage with you you only reapeat the same old 'stats' which you have lifetd from the internet, not exactly rocket science. When you have been engaged, for instance 'greying population', you may recall I pointed out the 'snowball effect' of adopting the policy of bringing in migrant workers to support pensions. You said you took the point on the 'snowball effect', yet still use the 'greying population' argument in your recent posts. So what is the point in engaing when you will have your view and I will have mine 'and never the twain shall meet'.
What have you provided by way of evidence to back up ANY claim you make? Or are you just a one hit wonder that follows the crowd?
We all have different views, my view is that 'uncontrolled immigration' will be the demise of the UK, whereas 'controlled immigration' could be the making of the UK. You still advocate 'uncontrolled migration'... we will just have to wait and see.
While on the point of evidence please could you provide the evidence that I am a 'racist'?
0
Like
|
Sorry nice try NORTHEN IRELAND but youre coming OUT too
TONY BLAIR sticking his big NOSE I SEE citing a Cival War in the UK but it does BEG the question what would be the result of ANOTHER referendum
WHAT do you think should we have ANOTHER REFERENDUM
I would still vote to leave but has ANYONE on the FORUM changed SIDES I wonder
SO like this post if you were an OUTIE but now have changed your mind
Love Hugh xx
This message was last edited by hughjardon on 28/10/2016.
This message was last edited by hughjardon on 28/10/2016.
_______________________
Done the Spain thing Happier in the UK
0
Like
|
Hugh I would like to like your comment, but this would give the wrong score as I have not changed my mind.
And neither have many others if this poll is to be believed:
https://www.eyeonspain.com/blogs/macpoll/16691/poll--hard-or-soft-brexit.aspx
0
Like
|