EU Brexit thread

[Vampyr]

Over half of immigrants come from outside of the EU. If politicians really felt that it was a serious problem they could drastically reduce that amount. The truth is that every analysis done on the subject has shown that immigrants are a positive and necessary part of the UK economy. Migrants from every EU country, particularly Poland, are a net plus. The countries that are questionable to benefits, perhaps even negative, are Pakistan and most of the African nations.

 

Are you sure it is EU immigration that people are afraid of? I mean, to be quite blunt, who would clean our houses and renovate our kitchens if not for Polish immigration. I would like to see an end result where some freedom of movement (not, eg benefit tourism) among Europe is still possible.

 

But it seems that all new residents prefer to live in London, where the housing situation is bad and constantly getting worse. London's position in England is much too dominant, and I don't see a solution to that.

[mike777]

Are you sure it is EU immigration that people are afraid of? I mean, to be quite blunt, who would clean our houses and renovate our kitchens if not for Polish immigration. I would like to see an end result where some freedom of movement (not, eg benefit tourism) among Europe is still possible.

 

But it seems that all new residents prefer to live in London, where the housing situation is bad and constantly getting worse. London's position in England is much too dominant, and I don't see a solution to that.

 

Vampyr....you note on this issue which you discuss often...but if you allow capitalism and free markets the problem will work itself out. The problem is you and many others demand a nonmarket answer.

Granted one that requires years

 

 

A simple basic answer I showed you a solution for millions..millions

 

 

YOUr response was.....you would be unhappy

[mike777]

Are you sure it is EU immigration that people are afraid of? I mean, to be quite blunt, who would clean our houses and renovate our kitchens if not for Polish immigration. I would like to see an end result where some freedom of movement (not, eg benefit tourism) among Europe is still possible.

 

But it seems that all new residents prefer to live in London, where the housing situation is bad and constantly getting worse. London's position in England is much too dominant, and I don't see a solution to that.

 

vAMP i HAVE TOLD you a possible solution over and over and over again....sigh yet you dont see it.

 

 

I will not repeat all of them but here is one:

1) less dominant position of lOndon

 

------

 

 

to put it another way if london house prices are insanely high...then move...live somewhere not in lONdon.....

 

 

 

I repeat te housing question in lOndon is old, very old and very easy to fix.

 

 

MOve

 

----------------

 

 

If cannot afford to live in LOndon...move...you fail to have the money

[mike777]

I give you a real very real world example...

 

 

My wife and I would love to live in London...we cannot afford it...we move.

 

 

--------------------

 

 

posters respond that we should pay for you or others should pay for you

[Zelandakh]

Are you sure it is EU immigration that people are afraid of? I mean, to be quite blunt, who would clean our houses and renovate our kitchens if not for Polish immigration. I would like to see an end result where some freedom of movement (not, eg benefit tourism) among Europe is still possible.

 

But it seems that all new residents prefer to live in London, where the housing situation is bad and constantly getting worse. London's position in England is much too dominant, and I don't see a solution to that.

Benefit tourism is one of those things that is talked about a lot but the evidence suggests it is practically non-existent for the UK. There are many reasons for this, from lack of knowledge of what the benefits are to the simple truth that benefits in the UK are amongst the least generous around. What is absolutely certain is that non-UK EU immigrants are less likely than UK citizens to claim the big benefits - unemployment benefit, housing benefit and tax credits.

 

As for London, well your first comment is to some extent an answer to your last. Perhaps people in and around London worry about their cleaners but those "in the sticks" tend to make the effort of cleaning their own houses. London is where the money is so naturally economic migrants cluster there, whether they be from other EU countries, outside the EU or even just from within the UK. Indeed, since many of the big employers of immigrants are distributed more widely throughout the UK, it would not surprise me if their migration pattern is actually less London-centric than migrating Brits. And you can count me in that as I was brought up in Dorset but made my way to South London before jetting over to Germany. Minus the Germany part, I suspect that is a story repeated many times. Perhaps the major of London should consider a ban on UK "immigrants" to his city! ;) :blink:

[helene_t]

Are you sure it is EU immigration that people are afraid of? I mean, to be quite blunt, who would clean our houses and renovate our kitchens if not for Polish immigration. I would like to see an end result where some freedom of movement (not, eg benefit tourism) among Europe is still possible.

According to the polls there is a quite strong correlation between high income/education and pro-EUness. This trend would be even stronger if you control for party confounding, since conservatives tend to have high income and also tend to be against EU.

 

I think this is consistent with immigration being perceived as an important part of the brexit issue: Rich people want immigrants to come and work for them, poor people don't want immigrants to steal their jobs.

 

As for benefit tourism, it is really a non-issue. And besides, if you want immigrants to come, stay and pay taxes, you also have to grant them a certain safety net.

[mike777]

According to the polls there is a quite strong correlation between high income/education and pro-EUness. This trend would be even stronger if you control for party confounding, since conservatives tend to have high income and also tend to be against EU.

 

I think this is consistent with immigration being perceived as an important part of the brexit issue: Rich people want immigrants to come and work for them, poor people don't want immigrants to steal their jobs.

 

As for benefit tourism, it is really a non-issue. And besides, if you want immigrants to come, stay and pay taxes, you also have to grant them a certain safety net.

 

 

Friedman argued it was a great benefit, a huge one that some immigrants came and paid taxes and in fact were entitled to get something close to none. Again these seem to be an old fashion..out of date ideas. Something where they paid and their children or grandchildren gained compared to the old country. A country that gained benefits from immigrants and those of a first generation gained or where entitled to very little.

 

 

As your post points out this has changed a great deal and in fact they are entitled.

----

 

Keep in mind we talk of a first generation that is older, sicker that fights so hard to get here that they work, pay taxes and then die, often die during the flight for a better life for their very young child or grandchild and get something close to zero in taxpayer benefits for themselves.

[Vampyr]

vAMP i HAVE TOLD you a possible solution over and over and over again....sigh yet you dont see it.

 

to put it another way if london house prices are insanely high...then move...live somewhere not in lONdon.....

 

 

 

I repeat te housing question in lOndon is old, very old and very easy to fix.

 

 

MOve

 

----------------

 

 

If cannot afford to live in LOndon...move...you fail to have the money

 

If only it were that simple.

 

If everyone who can't afford to live in London moved out, we would have no teachers, no nurses... People in these professions are paid so little (maybe a third of what they would get in eg the US, with the cost of living far higher) that special housing developments are built just for them.

 

There are in fact lots of very low-paying jobs in London that people rely on. Retail, child and elder care, and many more. You seem to think that I love paying housing benefit. I don't but I realise that it is necessary. What I don't like is that people who choose not to work also receive benefits, and in many cases would receive less if they got an unskilled job, so in fact it is also the fault of the way the benefit system works.

 

Finally, I find that I experience much less embarrassment when I post sober.

[PassedOut]

Finally, I find that I experience much less embarrassment when I post sober.

Nicely put.

[shyams]

LOL. Vote Leave is now convincingly ahead -- even according to the FT! https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/ tracks the poll of polls. And, for the first time, they think the Leave campaign is ahead by a greater than the margin for statistical error.

 

Bob Dylan

 

Come writers and critics, who prophesize with your pen

And keep your eyes wide, the chance won’t come again

And don’t speak too soon, for the wheel’s still in spin

And there’s no tellin’ who that it’s namin’

For the loser now will be later to win,

For the times they are a-changin’

[1eyedjack]

In one of the Bremain campaign's political broadcasts, they included sound-bites in support of staying in, provided by various from among the rich and famous. One of them was Stephen Hawking, who informs us that most advances in technology take place through co-operation. This observation is at odds with what I was always taught in history lessons at school: that it is conflict rather than harmony that drives technological advancement. Indeed much of the US dominance in micro-electronics, semi-conductors, computers and so forth arose from the space race between USA and Soviet Union in the 1960s. Had those countries been the best of lovey-dovey bum chums in that era it would have delayed progress, not accelerated it.

[shyams]

The Russian guide to Brexit

 

According to an op-ed written in the Moscow Times (link here), Brexit offers many opportunities for Russian people.

 

1. Property: Any dramatic fall in the value of British pound will dramatically improve the purchasing power of Russian wealth in London.

2. Opacity: Brexit will put to a halt the recent clamoring for full disclosures of foreign investments (esp. in the property market)!

3. British political class: Cheaper, opaque and less influential, the U.K. following Brexit would be a U.K. perfectly suited to Russian interests. It would be both weaker and friendlier.

4. Opportunities within the EU: Thrown into turmoil, Brussels and Berlin would no longer be able to enforce the consensus on Russia-focused sanctions. They would have to be dropped in order to create and reward allies for the far trickier negotiations (and likely punitive trade moves) between the U.K. and the bloc.

 

Makes for fun reading!

[mike777]

If only it were that simple.

 

If everyone who can't afford to live in London moved out, we would have no teachers, no nurses... People in these professions are paid so little (maybe a third of what they would get in eg the US, with the cost of living far higher) that special housing developments are built just for them.

 

There are in fact lots of very low-paying jobs in London that people rely on. Retail, child and elder care, and many more. You seem to think that I love paying housing benefit. I don't but I realise that it is necessary. What I don't like is that people who choose not to work also receive benefits, and in many cases would receive less if they got an unskilled job, so in fact it is also the fault of the way the benefit system works.

 

Finally, I find that I experience much less embarrassment when I post sober.

 

Vampyr, first off thanks for taking the time to write and reply with a very thought full post.

 

 

As someone who has visited London often. a great city, a very old city pretty city I understand your comments.

 

I grew up in Chicago, basically a city that is close to unlivable today where i grew up.

I lived in Los Angles very many years, a city unlivable for the most part. NOte many who claim to live there in fact do not live in the city. The few who do live in very rich areas.

 

 

My point was London, the city, sounds like it has become unlivable unless you are rich, very rich...you know the facts best but moving should be an option for you.

[Vampyr]

My point was London, the city, sounds like it has become unlivable unless you are rich, very rich...you know the facts best but moving should be an option for you.

 

What do you mean, an option for me personally?

[mike777]

What do you mean, an option for me personally?

 

 

YES

[Vampyr]

YES

 

I do not think that my leaving would do anything to affect the housing crisis. My partner and I have only one house.

[mike777]

I do not think that my leaving would do anything to affect the housing crisis. My partner and I have only one house.

 

 

i THOUGHT YOU WERE unhappy, grossly unhappy....if not nevermind

 

 

I note I now live close to a tiny town called Ashville,... I dont live there but Asheville is a tiny town, artsy town with pretensions :)

 

 

Compare that to london perhaps the greatest city on the planet but if you are unhappy.

[Vampyr]

I have done some more research, and the LEAVE oops I meant REMAIN campaign have come up with some facts, perhaps realising that their vagueness and hand-wringing were not convincing many people.

 

For many I expect that facts either way will not matter much; after Cameron's humiliation leaving, for good or ill, is a matter of national pride.

 

EDIT: meant the REMAIN campaign.

[mike777]

I have done some more research, and the LEAVE campaign have come up with some facts, perhaps realising that their vagueness and hand-wringing were not convincing many people.

 

For many I expect that fa status either way will not matter much; are Camerson's humiliation leaving, for good or ill, is a matter of national pride.

 

Fair enough so your vote is?

[Vampyr]

Here's an interesting Article

 

I always thought that refusing to grant Britain a deal was a big mistake. It may come to be the EU’s last big mistake.

[Zelandakh]

I have done some more research, and the LEAVE campaign have come up with some facts, perhaps realising that their vagueness and hand-wringing were not convincing many people.

 

For many I expect that facts either way will not matter much; after Cameron's humiliation leaving, for good or ill, is a matter of national pride.

I would double check all of those facts if I were you. I usually love a good political debate but have found myself unable to sit through them for this referendum due to the large number of inconsistent or downright misleading positions being taken. There are examples from both sides but the Leave campaigners are particularly guilty.

 

The most recent where I had intended to watch but turned off in disgust after a short time was Gove's Q&A. An example, when asked about Turkey scaremongering his response was about their membership "within a lifetime" and that the government had no intention of using their veto. OK, so at some point within the next 70 years the subject might come up. Who will be in the government at that time? He obviously knows if he can state so categorically that no veto would be used. Not to mention that Turkey will probably be a rather different place in 70 years' time. And the UK too for that matter. And if the people genuinely were against being in a political union at that time, no PM would accept it as they would be out of a job in the following election.

 

It is a complete house of cards, as is so much of the Leave campaign's message. That so many seem to accept it is worrying. Indeed, it is so obviously rubbish, I am at the point where I would probably lose respect for anyone voting Leave. It seems to be the UK equivalent of voting for Trump, a sign of low education or racist values. Neither are things I wish to see in people I call friends!

[shyams]

The most recent where I had intended to watch but turned off in disgust after a short time was Gove's Q&A. An example, when asked about Turkey scaremongering his response was about their membership "within a lifetime" and that the government had no intention of using their veto. OK, so at some point within the next 70 years the subject might come up. Who will be in the government at that time? He obviously knows if he can state so categorically that no veto would be used. Not to mention that Turkey will probably be a rather different place in 70 years' time.

Gove is 48. Assuming an average lifetime for a male Brit is 83 years, that's 35 more years.

And, "in my lifetime" does not mean in the last year of his lifetime -- so he is realistically talking about 20 years.

 

I saw the Gove referendum Q&A too. And I can say he was so much more measured than the Farages & the Johnsons of the world. And even I (a Remain voter) felt he was cogent & persuasive.

[Zelandakh]

He did not say "my lifetime" but "our lifetimes", which is extremely open to pretty much any interpretation he wants to put on it. To say that he meant 20 years by that is reading more into it than he said. Which is of course the whole point of using this phrase - it makes a distant possibility seem like a current threat. It is not. It is indeed scaremongering. I find Portillo a much more persuasive speaker on the subject and immeasurably more watchable.

[Vampyr]

I would double check all of those facts if I were you. I usually love a good political debate but have found myself unable to sit through them for this referendum due to the large number of inconsistent or downright misleading positions being taken. There are examples from both sides but the Leave campaigners are particularly guilty.

 

The most recent where I had intended to watch but turned off in disgust after a short time was Gove's Q&A. An example, when asked about Turkey scaremongering his response was about their membership "within a lifetime" and that the government had no intention of using their veto. OK, so at some point within the next 70 years the subject might come up. Who will be in the government at that time? He obviously knows if he can state so categorically that no veto would be used. Not to mention that Turkey will probably be a rather different place in 70 years' time. And the UK too for that matter. And if the people genuinely were against being in a political union at that time, no PM would accept it as they would be out of a job in the following election.

 

It is a complete house of cards, as is so much of the Leave campaign's message. That so many seem to accept it is worrying. Indeed, it is so obviously rubbish, I am at the point where I would probably lose respect for anyone voting Leave. It seems to be the UK equivalent of voting for Trump, a sign of low education or racist values. Neither are things I wish to see in people I call friends!

 

Oops, I meant the REMAIN campaign.

[helene_t]

Oops, I meant the REMAIN campaign.

Good, then you don't need to double check :)