EU Brexit thread

[Vampyr]

This is my impression too, although if we exited the EU, it would require a vote in the UK parliament and if we're stupid enough to vote for it, that's our problem. I think we can get it without a vote here if we stay in the EU (although I'm not sure of that), and that I object to.

 

Yes, I was wondering whether we might have some control if the process was being done by our elected representatives.

[helene_t]

No one knows who their MEP is (and does it matter, since the major decisions seem to be made by people who don't, even nominally, represent anyone?) I am sure we all remember Cecilia "I do not take my mandate from the European people" Malstrom. Assuming she is not doing it just for laughs, the obvious question is whose payroll she is on, and why is that not being investigated?

I agree that the democratic deficit is a huge problem. Multinational organizations like UN and OECD are not democratic either but EU has so much power that it really ought to be a democracy.

 

I can see why it is difficult to acchieve: Political parties (with the somewhat-exception of the social democrats) don't exist at the EU level. Still I think it is a bad excuse.

 

As for Cecilia's pay check, my impression is that the EU is a lot less corrupt than most national governments. Maybe someone knows some relevant data points?

[Vampyr]

I agree that the democratic deficit is a huge problem. Multinational organizations like UN and OECD are not democratic either but EU has so much power that it really ought to be a democracy.

 

I can see why it is difficult to acchieve: Political parties (with the somewhat-exception of the social democrats) don't exist at the EU level. Still I think it is a bad excuse.

 

As for Cecilia's pay check, my impression is that the EU is a lot less corrupt than most national governments. Maybe someone knows some relevant data points?

 

And why are political parties necessary for democracy?

[fromageGB]

Not particularly, it just looked like a UKIP press release (particularly the bit about gallons and bendy bananas).

Yes, that was a deliberate wry quote. I have never appeared on HIGNFY.

[fromageGB]

And this is the real problem, the real figures for what we spend are difficult to find, and I have no idea what the real figure for how much we get out is. I certainly don't believe the figures the in campaign are putting out (£60M/day).

Where did you see that £60M/day? And you are implying this is what we get OUT???

 

Figures I can find are these :

 

Budget statement March 2015 was that the projected net contribution for the year was projected to be £9.9 billion (US billion, times 10 to the 9), revised in July to £10.4 billion. This is a net £28.5M / day payment IN, not out

 

www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06091.pdf of Jan 2016, itself quoting ONS and other sources of Nov/Dec 2015, section 4 says that gross contribution = £17.8B, rebate £4.9B, so net contribution after rebate is £15.3B, but then we have public sector receipts of £4.4B, giving net contribution of £8.5B. That's payment IN of £23M / day.

 

The fullfact organisation also says net £8.5B, ie £23M / day net payment.

 

One of the papers said £35M/day net payment.

 

Hence my conservative figure I gave earlier of over 20M. It seems that £23M/day payment IN is the best figure.

 

If you (or other people) are turning this into a £60M payment OUT, then you must be assigning fairly arbitrary and gigantic figures to the "benefits" of not having to bother to make our own laws, or of finding cheap labour for us.

[Cyberyeti]

Where did you see that £60M/day? And you are implying this is what we get OUT???

 

On an "IN" campaign FB post which is why I didn't believe it.

[Vampyr]

Yes, that was a deliberate wry quote. I have never appeared on HIGNFY.

 

Then you are apparently not Nigel Farage!

[helene_t]

It is my impression that many British EU opponents have a vision of Norwegian solution, i.e. still member of the free trade zone . A bit more sovereignty, less financial contributions, almost zero influence. Maybe that sounds attractive. In any case, if that was what the referendum was about it would not be a big deal. For all practical purposes, Norway is an EU country.

 

But for UK to be able to enjoy freeloader status requires that EU survives. The EU is already in danger of fragmentation: Poland and Hungary already have anti-EU governments and France could soon get one also. A Brexit will inspire similar referenda in various other countries.

 

If you think that the most important issue is whether you want Brussels bureaucrats or London bureaucrats to determine the curvature of bananas, the maybe try reading this: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2016/03/can_nato_and_the_eu_survive_donald_trump_french_nationalists_and_a_brexit.html

[StevenG]

If you think that the most important issue is whether you want Brussels bureaucrats or London bureaucrats to determine the curvature of bananas

No, people think the most important thing is immigration. There is a housing shortage which is getting worse all the time.

 

House prices are out of control and the average person can no longer expect ever to be able to afford to buy their own home. (That may not seem important to a continental European, but it is part of the British psyche.) What houses are being built are often so tiny that people only buy them because there is nothing else.

 

Business, in general, supports the EU because open borders mean a supply of cheap labour which suppresses wages at the lower end of the labour market. Not surprisingly, those British nationals who have lost their jobs, or are working under really awful conditions for low wages don't regard this as a good thing.

 

The last recorded "net migration" figures showed a yearly inflow of about 320,000 people. It is impossible to manage that sort of population growth year on year. (Many suspect that the real figure is actually much higher since the figure does not reconcile easily with other government statistics.)

 

Of course there are some who also object to immigration on racist grounds. I deplore that, but nationalistic tensions will always surface when the traditional ways are put under such pressure so quickly, and people will vote accordingly. It is wrong, however, for people to confuse anti-immigration policies with racism, when analysis shows the damage done by high immigration levels to the quality of life of many people.

[Vampyr]

q v

But for UK to be able to enjoy freeloader status requires that EU survives. The EU is already in danger of fragmentation: Poland and Hungary already have anti-EU governments and France could soon get one also. A Brexit will inspire similar referenda in various other countries.

 

Isn't the demise of the EU and the return of the EEC the ideal outcome?

 

EDIT: that article makes no sense. NATO managed for decades before the EU, and should manage just fine afterwards.

[mike777]

No, people think the most important thing is immigration. There is a housing shortage which is getting worse all the time.

 

House prices are out of control and the average person can no longer expect ever to be able to afford to buy their own home. (That may not seem important to a continental European, but it is part of the British psyche.) What houses are being built are often so tiny that people only buy them because there is nothing else.

 

Business, in general, supports the EU because open borders mean a supply of cheap labour which suppresses wages at the lower end of the labour market. Not surprisingly, those British nationals who have lost their jobs, or are working under really awful conditions for low wages don't regard this as a good thing.

 

The last recorded "net migration" figures showed a yearly inflow of about 320,000 people. It is impossible to manage that sort of population growth year on year. (Many suspect that the real figure is actually much higher since the figure does not reconcile easily with other government statistics.)

 

Of course there are some who also object to immigration on racist grounds. I deplore that, but nationalistic tensions will always surface when the traditional ways are put under such pressure so quickly, and people will vote accordingly. It is wrong, however, for people to confuse anti-immigration policies with racism, when analysis shows the damage done by high immigration levels to the quality of life of many people.

 

 

Given housing costs are out of control and that the rich already own a few homes it gives the impression of a massive bubble as no one is buying and a good opportunity soon. Sounds like it is time to short real estate in the UK :)

 

 

BTW with all of that very cheap labor and depressed wages why not build cheap housing? Commodity prices have crashed so materials are really much cheaper now! Steel prices have crashed, copper is down 50%, oil is down 60-70%, you tell me labor is cheap...you can build a lot of cheap housing with all of that.

 

YOu make it sound like it is a great time to short the out of control expensive homes and go long on the really cheap housing.

[sakuragi]

it seems like

1. 
    
   
2. the uk admin prefers staying in EU
   
3. the uk admin estimates that the referendum would favor staying in EU
   
4. the brexit is only part of negotiation strategy
   

[StevenG]

BTW with all of that very cheap labor and depressed wages why not build cheap housing? Commodity prices have crashed so materials are really much cheaper now! Steel prices have crashed, copper is down 50%, oil is down 60-70%, you tell me labor is cheap...you can build a lot of cheap housing with all of that.

Where do you expect to build these cheap houses? What do you think happens to land prices for building plots when such land is as scarce as it is? Why should any developer build cheap houses when they can sell expensive ones?

[helene_t]

The banker takes 19 [of the 20] cookies and warns the worker: "The asylum seeker is taking your cookie

I probably have the opposite bias but as I see it, poor immigrants are not the main culprit of the housing crisis. Wealth inequality allows a few rich people to own most of the land suitable for housing, making land unaffordable to ordinary people regardless of nationality. This doesn't have much to do with globalization. My guess would be that migration has caused a negative nett pressure on the British property market because British expats tend to be better off than immigrants in the UK, and richer people demand more land for housing.

 

If you absolutely need to blame some foreigners then blame the Russian mafia and the Saudi princes for pushing up property prices in London.

 

It is a really annoying phenomena that people prefer to find poor scapegoats instead of rich scapegoats. I am not a sociologist but my guess would be that it is because it feels good to identify oneself with the fat cats while distancing oneself from the roaches.

 

Not surprisingly, those British nationals who have lost their jobs, or are working under really awful conditions for low wages don't regard this as a good thing.

British industry workers lost their jobs because we buy industry products from China. After having left the EU It may well be in the interest of British workers to isolate the country from the rest of the World, but I think that the majority of the British people don't want to lose their cheap Chinese imports.

[mike777]

Where do you expect to build these cheap houses? What do you think happens to land prices for building plots when such land is as scarce as it is? Why should any developer build cheap houses when they can sell expensive ones?

THINK OUT OF THE BOX!

 

You can build and sell a 100 or 200 or even 400 cheap condo homes, build up, on the space of roughly one or two single family homes. Tear downs are very very common. Buy a house or two and tear it down and build up!

 

Again why sell expensive homes if no one is buying them....at some point and you make it sound today, the rich own several homes already. At some point the rich start selling not buying. For example this is happening today in many places in China. Again I am only going on your post that home prices are "out of control".

 

 

btw if land is really really that scarce,,,you can always build more land....many countries do this when land is scarce. For example I think they did this at Canary Wharf a few years ago. Also Hong Kong and places in the middle east do this. Even in places in the USA they have added land.

[akwoo]

The real culprit for the housing crisis is stupid zoning laws. (In most places, tearing down a single family home and putting up 100 condos is illegal.)

[kenberg]

I probably have the opposite bias but as I see it, poor immigrants are not the main culprit of the housing crisis. Wealth inequality allows a few rich people to own most of the land suitable for housing, making land unaffordable to ordinary people regardless of nationality. This doesn't have much to do with globalization. My guess would be that migration has caused a negative nett pressure on the British property market because British expats tend to be better off than immigrants in the UK, and richer people demand more land for housing.

 

If you absolutely need to blame some foreigners then blame the Russian mafia and the Saudi princes for pushing up property prices in London.

 

It is a really annoying phenomena that people prefer to find poor scapegoats instead of rich scapegoats. I am not a sociologist but my guess would be that it is because it feels good to identify oneself with the fat cats while distancing oneself from the roaches.

 

 

British industry workers lost their jobs because we buy industry products from China. After having left the EU It may well be in the interest of British workers to isolate the country from the rest of the World, but I think that the majority of the British people don't want to lose their cheap Chinese imports.

 

 

Helene,

Among anyone I know, I think you have moved the most from country to country. I think you briefly considered the USA. So I am going to ask for your impression. Not proof, just your impression.

 

Take a modest profession. For example, when I see a doctor I call the office and there is some scheduling and some paper work to be done. Someone does this. Or consider a gardener for a national cemetery. Or a roofer.

 

Let's now consider what, for many, is a goal for life: Marriage, family, a house, and perhaps children.

 

Do you see the UK as being better, worse, or about the same as other countries when Joe and Jo attempt to reach their goals?

 

I am struck by the similarities of the discussion here with discussions in the US, At one time, people such as my father, immigrant, school ending after 8th grade (=age 13), succeeded in a goal such as described above. The thought is that this is no longer possible. Not possible here, not possible I gather in the UK, maybe not in the EU. As I grew up, my father's income sufficed. Now it is not clear that both parents working will suffice. Although I know cases where it seems to, so this is confusing.

 

 

Feel free to vary the parameters as you see fit if you can respond here.

I don't expect to be telling the English what they are to do on the In/Out debate, but I hope to understand the issues surrounding this.

[helene_t]

Let's now consider what, for many, is a goal for life: Marriage, family, a house, and perhaps children.

 

Do you see the UK as being better, worse, or about the same as other countries when Joe and Jo attempt to reach their goals?

I am flattered that you consider me a relevant source in this matter but the truth is that I have only moved between relatively similar countries and mostly I have applied for jobs in the academic field which is obviously very homogenous worldwide compared to other trades.

 

Nevertheless I have a few observations of the UK compared to other countries with respect to the way hopefull immigrants are welcomed. Obviously too small a sample size to draw any conclusions, but I will try.

 

My own experience with immigration officials, healthcare, housing market, job market etc was much more positive in the UK than in other countries, even when compared to my native Denmark where you should think that I, as a returning expat, would face minimal discrimination. But this is an unfair comparison since UK was the last country I moved to, and things become smoother as European integration progresses (first time I moved to NL I was technically an illegal immigrant, things have changed), society becomes more modern, and above all my own skills and experience have improved over the years. And I spoke English already before moving to the UK. In fact, when I moved to the Netherlands for the third time (now speaking the language fluently and having a PhD and a job offer, and NL having implemented the Maastricht treatment) I faced a smooth settling process similarly to moving to the UK.

 

With that in mind, and also when looking at how colleagues from non-EU countries have been treated, I still rate the UK as an extremely immigrant-friendly country, with Denmark being very anti-immigrant and the Netherlands somewhere in between. Some cases stories:

 

My inlaws are somewhat atypical Polish immigrants in the sense that they don't stick to the Polish community but mend with the locals. Sister-in-law hitchhiked from Katowice to Kent (a place without much Polish community), no money and no plans, a driver who picked her up just days before her money were running out allowed her to stay at her place, she got a relationship with the driver's son, got a job in the NHS, got married to a UKIP-voter who hates all immigrants except his own family, bought an adorable terraced house and set up a small business. Somehow I find it difficult to imagine this happening in Denmark.

 

All three stepsons also set up their own businesses. Gosh13 also, as well as her cousin. This obviously says more about the Polish diaspoara in general and my inlaws in particular than about the UK, but in Denmark they would have run into so many problems with bureacracy, unions, adverse tax incitements and lack of customer acceptance that some if not all of them would probably have stumbled.

 

A friend married a guy from Kenya and took him to the Netherlands. He got so depressed from all the racism he faced, not so much overt racism from random people on the street but more the coldness from colleagues and neighbours who are too civilised to shout racist swearwords at him but ..... . So eventually they moved to Kenya with their two children. A somewhat unusual story from the Netherlands, but similar stories are frequent in Denmark. Much less in the UK, in my impression.

 

Maybe the general picture is this: In Denmark it is extremely difficult to get anywhere at all as a newcomer. Police, local authorities, landlords, employers will all do what they can to keep you out of the country or at least confined to an assylum centre or some ghetto where crime and unemployment benefits are the most natural sources of income. But once you manage to become one of "them" (which does occasinally happen to some very persistent immigrants, or those with very valuable professional qualifications), you will enjoy all the benefits of an egalitarian society, i.e. there will be no particular reason why your children couldn't become CEOs or marry someone from the royal family.

 

In the UK, the situation is completely different and probably familiar to you as an American (USA probably even more extreme than the UK): It is very easy to get a little bit integrated in the society: find a semi-regular job and semi-regular housing, become a semi-legal immigrant etc. But getting from there to the British middle class is a long haul which can take generations, and in the meantime you are in the same sh!t as the native underdogs.

 

And then the Netherlands is somewhere in between.

 

I thought of a rant about Israel also but nevermind - I lived in a kibbutz which is somewhat detached from the normal Israelian society, about which I can't say much. Spoiler: This was a bizare experience in good and bad ways, and makes all the Western European countries look very similar to each other.

[Zelandakh]

If you absolutely need to blame some foreigners then blame the Russian mafia and the Saudi princes for pushing up property prices in London.

It may be an unpopular view but those "foreigners" are pretty much what has kept the UK economy afloat during this crisis. The economy is still built on house prices just as much as it always has been, perhaps more. Every time there is negative equity this is a disaster for the UK. It may be terrible for individuals trying to get onto the property ladder that house prices did not fall more than they did but it is invaluable on a macro level. "Out of control" will be the result of the economy doing relatively well for as long as the economy remains structured the way it is. Immigration helps to support that process to the extent that if every immigrant left the country tomorrow, it could easily lead to a decline that takes a generation to recover from.

 

But sure, blame the people coming in filling skill shortages and doing the minimum-wage jobs no Brit is willing to do for all that is wrong with the world. Statistically it is very clear that immigrants, particularly those from Eastern Europe and India, benefit the UK economy enormously. If we were to have a logical economic policy after a "Leave" vote it would probably include (close to) free movement from those countries. But one has then to ask, what would we get from an exit other than additional trade tariffs and the ability to squash workers' rights? The former is essentially the reason why the LibDems, CBI and most business leaders are against an exit, the latter the reasoning of the Labour party and most industrial unions.

 

Finally, to Ken, it varies greatly between areas in the UK as to how foreigners are seen. As a teenager I lived with foster parents and the "father" was quite open about having agreed with some of the other men in the sleepy Dorset village that if any black family ever moved in, they would drive them out before any more could arrive. And I would suggest that is not atypical of many traditional Tory areas, even if it is usually less overt. The cities tend to have a different attitude but even there it is often the case that 2 or 3 communities develop that have almost no contact between them. As an example, when I did door-to-door canvassing in Manchester, we almost never knocked an Asian estate.

 

In my view the racism still runs deep and that is certainly a major factor in the coming referendum. The other is related, that many want a return to some idealised Britain before the wars, where we "rule the waves" and have a seat at the top table in world affairs. That notion is nonsense of course but the idea is a powerful one and one that I think the "Leave" camp will need to tap into if they are to mount a successful campaign.

[kenberg]

Thanks Helene.

 

Of course I believe in data and statistics, but I also put a great deal of stock in personal observation and judgment. Your post was very interesting.

[Vampyr]

Where do you expect to build these cheap houses? What do you think happens to land prices for building plots when such land is as scarce as it is? Why should any developer build cheap houses when they can sell expensive ones?

 

I was wondering also where mike777 lives that he imagines that there is all this land waiting around to be built on.

[helene_t]

But sure, blame the people coming in filling skill shortages and doing the minimum-wage jobs no Brit is willing to do for all that is wrong with the world. Statistically it is very clear that immigrants, particularly those from Eastern Europe and India, benefit the UK economy enormously.

I think it is important to shed light on exactly how immigrants benefit the economy. It is not necesarilly about pressing wages down and thereby boost company profits. When I first moved to the Netherlands, I had an enourmous number (appr 100) job interviews, and I often asked the reps why they had chosen to set up their business in the Netherlands, and how it was to run a business there compared to other countries. Some reactions I still recall:

The Netherlands is a closed community. If I need anything from the bank, for example, I have to send a native deputee. A Dutch bank would never lend money to an Englishman

The Netherlands is an open society. I can do my business here in fair competition with Dutch companies

Amsterdam is full of beautiful girls from all over the World. And the jobs we can offer them would hardly be legal, never mind qualifying us to sponsor their residence permit, in many other places

Production staff can be hired anywhere. We need to set up the factory in a place where it is easy to recruit R/D staff

Lately we needed to bring over 40 Brasilians to to serve Portuguese speaking customers. Their work permits were sorted in less than two weeks. In most other countries it would have taken months

Obviously those employers are not typical - they were all in a position to move their business abroad and might well do so if the immigration authorities did not cooperate. If I had asked a restaurant owner or the owner of a small construction company, the picture would have been different.

Compare the remarks from the British and the Bangladeshi business owner. Same region, same industry, established around the same time. But maybe their frame of references were different.

The British guy send me a long email apologising for not being able to offer me a job although I was the best qualified candidate. But he was afraid that customers would not like the fact that I was transsexual. He also said that in the UK he would never have been honest about this since it would be illegal but in the Netherlands discrimination is apparently OK. The Bangladeshi guy, like most employers, didn't give any feedback on the interview.

[helene_t]

what would we get from an exit other than additional trade tariffs and the ability to squash workers' rights?

Good point. BTW two additional benefits would be the ability to squash the environment, and consumer's rights.

[StevenG]

I think it is important to shed light on exactly how immigrants benefit the economy

When you talk about "the economy", do you mean a set of numbers? Because I take the view that the economy should be something with a purpose, and that that purpose should benefit the people within the economy. So, in my view, suppressing wages does not benefit those people who have lower wages than they would without the immigrants.

 

I don't see the other measures that are quoted as necessarily of value, either. Sometimes we are told that immigrants pay more taxes than they receive in benefits. Yet, we are not told what the effect is on benefit payments to and taxes received from the native population. Sometimes we are told that, on average, one immigrant creates more than one job. I find that so counter-intuitive that I cannot believe the truth of it. But, even if it were true, so what? The jobs created are essentially non-productive jobs - teachers, nurses, police, etc.. This is economic activity, not wealth creation. (An elderly person with dementia also creates jobs in the care industry, while clearly no longer being of any economic benefit.)

 

I take the view that the balance of trade is the key statistic. It is still massively in deficit and shows no sign of ever improving. As a country, we consume far more each year than we create. That is not a sustainable position and population growth only exacerbates the situation.

[Vampyr]

I lived in Estonia during the period when they were hoping to get into the EU. Their decision-making and fact-finding process revolved mainly around talks with Irish officials. The Estonians wanted to join the EU solely to be given a similar sum of money as had been recently given to the Irish. Just saying.

 

By the way, if discrimination in the Netherlands is legal, it seems to indicate that good laws and regulations from the UK are not exported to the rest of the EU, while we have to adopt poor laws and regulations from elsewhere.