Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The influence of the EU on Britain.

1601602603604606

Comments

  • Leuth said:

    Prague, it's not that you're necessarily wrong, but you have to be SO careful when you generalise. The optics are so easy to misjudge. So while I'd agree that there are a lot of nonsense justifications for a Brexit vote, it isn't really worth using the word 'uneducated' at all. You're winning nobody over, and you're alienating everyone who doesn't want to read between the lines. And as we've established, that is a lot of people

    Up to a point you are right, (although I wrote "less educated") and because I was writing the original line in haste, and with some ire, it wasn't as clear as it could have been.

    However I would like to say this about the dialogue on here, and the 'standards' we should adhere to. These "optics" are of course essential for politicians who seek to lead and to influence. This is a forum of football fans, we are (unless otherwise declared) representing ourselves, nothing more, and we are all equal. I'm getting a bit sick of being told how careful Remainers have to be not to "patronise" the Brexit side, while people on the Brexit side can come on here and write, e.g. nothing more than "Fuck the EU" and then run away, or LOL (without follow up) a post asserting nothing more controversial than why we have run out of time for a referendum. Is that worthy of respect? Not in my book. Not when the evidence of the monstrous consequences of the vote are mounting up for all to see.



    @PragueAddick You would be better of using the term "Thick fucks' which seemed to garner support across the leave/remain divide when I used it the other day. Smiley thing.
  • aliwibble said:

    Yes, but that wasn't the start, that was the result.

    The start was the "left" not allowing anyone to discuss their concerns, not about immigration, but about the HIGH LEVELS of immigration, without being called racist or bigot.

    The Labour government deliberately sought HIGH LEVELS of immigration to rub the oppositions noses in it.

    So, UKIP was formed and started to grow as more central parties were too afraid to speak out.

    No, the reason the Labour Government sought "high levels" of immigration is because we need more people of working age to pay the pensions and the healthcare costs of the increasing numbers of OAPs, due to the combination of increasing life spans and the demographic bulge that is the Baby Boomer generation.

    It's the 50+ version of puppy fat....
  • aliwibble said:

    Yes, but that wasn't the start, that was the result.

    The start was the "left" not allowing anyone to discuss their concerns, not about immigration, but about the HIGH LEVELS of immigration, without being called racist or bigot.

    The Labour government deliberately sought HIGH LEVELS of immigration to rub the oppositions noses in it.

    So, UKIP was formed and started to grow as more central parties were too afraid to speak out.

    No, the reason the Labour Government sought "high levels" of immigration is because we need more people of working age to pay the pensions and the healthcare costs of the increasing numbers of OAPs, due to the combination of increasing life spans and the demographic bulge that is the Baby Boomer generation.

    baby boomers are possibly the most damaging generation ever.
  • aliwibble said:

    Yes, but that wasn't the start, that was the result.

    The start was the "left" not allowing anyone to discuss their concerns, not about immigration, but about the HIGH LEVELS of immigration, without being called racist or bigot.

    The Labour government deliberately sought HIGH LEVELS of immigration to rub the oppositions noses in it.

    So, UKIP was formed and started to grow as more central parties were too afraid to speak out.

    No, the reason the Labour Government sought "high levels" of immigration is because we need more people of working age to pay the pensions and the healthcare costs of the increasing numbers of OAPs, due to the combination of increasing life spans and the demographic bulge that is the Baby Boomer generation.

    Baby boomer bulge - how dare you!
  • el-pietro said:

    It would probably be in January - It would mean article 50 would have to be put on hold. Which it will be because the EU's preferred option is us not leaving at all. We do have to grow a pair. In many ways, it is better we don't rush into the referendum and do it after May's vote. What is completely unbelievable with some, and I include you in that Prague with all respect, is that winning the referendum is as important as getting it. If it looks like Remainers have constructed this, it will be harder to win. If it is a last resort, it is infinitely better. We have to fall into it.


    Mate, let's try again. In order to have a referendum, the Government of the day has to want it, and to get a Referendum Bill passed in the HoC. Given that May's WA debate has been put back to mid Jan, that's half that month gone. Everyone expects her to lose. Even if the very next day she says "OK, let's have another referendum" you've seen for yourself that there is no agreement within her party for that, indeed Rees-Mogg will doubtless grab the Mace and attack her with it in the name of "democracy". Then even if the principal of a referendum is agreed, they need a further debate about the questions. And then, they need to get it drafted and through Parliament. There is no way.

    You're a printer, there must have been times, especially in the pre digital age, you had to tell a client that it's simply too late?
    All the time,even in this digital age, people tend to leave things to the last minute for all sorts of reasons, but my point is that it isn't too late. And when Labour don't get their desired election, there is a majority for a referendum in the house when there isn't a majority for anything else. The problem is that the majority is small and requires Tory MPs who might change their mind. So we should all be worried, but the numbers do work. They might be more likely to work the nearer the edge of the cliff we are although it is frustrating.

    I think you have to have faith in two things - which I do - and that is there are enough sensible Tories who won't allow the damage a hard Brexit will cause and secondly, you have to believe the EU will be supportive around us having a second vote, and I think they will, especially as they have hinted so.

    I simply can't believe that the least popular option which everybody who is remotely sensible can see has the potential to be highly damaging will be allowed to happen.

    It is frustrating that the no confidence vote in the Government hasn't happened, but it is important that May's plan is given its chance to be passed first. The delay is the fault of the government and nobody else.

    It is a good point about the questions. This I am unsure about, but if a referendum is voted on, couldn't the terms of the referendum be included in that vote. I think and hope that some of the Christmas break time will be spent with like minded people of all parties working out the strategy and the numbers and the question so it plays out as soon as May's deal has been voted against.

    The damage inflicted by a xenophobic campaign banging on about immigration 24/7 has led to where we are today

    Yes, but that wasn't the start, that was the result.

    The start was the "left" not allowing anyone to discuss their concerns, not about immigration, but about the HIGH LEVELS of immigration, without being called racist or bigot.

    The Labour government deliberately sought HIGH LEVELS of immigration to rub the oppositions noses in it.

    So, UKIP was formed and started to grow as more central parties were too afraid to speak out.
    Immigration isn't the cause. If it were then the areas with high immigration would be more likely to vote Leave. That is not what happened. Wealth inequality is the real cause but it suits the UK government to allow people to blame immigration because they are responsible for wealth inequality and either have no answers for it, or don't want to solve the problem.
    Quite and if Labour had allowed the debate/discussion this may have been avoided.
    They could have tried harder to explain about wealth inequality, but they didn't do/say enough.
    They simply closed down anyone trying to discuss the matter by calling them racists and bigots.
  • It would probably be in January - It would mean article 50 would have to be put on hold. Which it will be because the EU's preferred option is us not leaving at all. We do have to grow a pair. In many ways, it is better we don't rush into the referendum and do it after May's vote. What is completely unbelievable with some, and I include you in that Prague with all respect, is that winning the referendum is as important as getting it. If it looks like Remainers have constructed this, it will be harder to win. If it is a last resort, it is infinitely better. We have to fall into it.


    Mate, let's try again. In order to have a referendum, the Government of the day has to want it, and to get a Referendum Bill passed in the HoC. Given that May's WA debate has been put back to mid Jan, that's half that month gone. Everyone expects her to lose. Even if the very next day she says "OK, let's have another referendum" you've seen for yourself that there is no agreement within her party for that, indeed Rees-Mogg will doubtless grab the Mace and attack her with it in the name of "democracy". Then even if the principal of a referendum is agreed, they need a further debate about the questions. And then, they need to get it drafted and through Parliament. There is no way.

    You're a printer, there must have been times, especially in the pre digital age, you had to tell a client that it's simply too late?
    All the time,even in this digital age, people tend to leave things to the last minute for all sorts of reasons, but my point is that it isn't too late. And when Labour don't get their desired election, there is a majority for a referendum in the house when there isn't a majority for anything else. The problem is that the majority is small and requires Tory MPs who might change their mind. So we should all be worried, but the numbers do work. They might be more likely to work the nearer the edge of the cliff we are although it is frustrating.

    I think you have to have faith in two things - which I do - and that is there are enough sensible Tories who won't allow the damage a hard Brexit will cause and secondly, you have to believe the EU will be supportive around us having a second vote, and I think they will, especially as they have hinted so.

    I simply can't believe that the least popular option which everybody who is remotely sensible can see has the potential to be highly damaging will be allowed to happen.

    It is frustrating that the no confidence vote in the Government hasn't happened, but it is important that May's plan is given its chance to be passed first. The delay is the fault of the government and nobody else.

    It is a good point about the questions. This I am unsure about, but if a referendum is voted on, couldn't the terms of the referendum be included in that vote. I think and hope that some of the Christmas break time will be spent with like minded people of all parties working out the strategy and the numbers and the question so it plays out as soon as May's deal has been voted against.

    The damage inflicted by a xenophobic campaign banging on about immigration 24/7 has led to where we are today

    Yes, but that wasn't the start, that was the result.

    The start was the "left" not allowing anyone to discuss their concerns, not about immigration, but about the HIGH LEVELS of immigration, without being called racist or bigot.

    The Labour government deliberately sought HIGH LEVELS of immigration to rub the oppositions noses in it.

    So, UKIP was formed and started to grow as more central parties were too afraid to speak out.
    Immigration was weaponised by the right. That's where Windrush and "limiting immigration to the tens of thousands" came from. It's a classic device to divide and deflect the working class vote and was juxtaposed with uber low interest rates enabling those with capital to make a killing.

    For sure one million polish people came to the UK but today there is net emigration for the EU. Labour looked for high EU immigration to keep wage inflation pressures down and to influence the electoral mix.Think about that for a minute...

    The Labour Party front bench imported cheaper foreign Labour to undercut wage rates and undermine organised labour. And still people want a Macron / Blair type third way merchant back. And people wonder why the left have questions about the Single Market.

    And so one agrees 100% that the centrist parties across Europe lost their way. Not just out of touch with their constituents but way too focussed on inflation and GDP growth - numbers on spreadsheets!

    As posted a couple of times before, the centrists have lost 25% of the electorate since 2014 across Europe which proves your point. German liberals and hippies running ferries and rescue boats in the Med enabled people traffickers to push close to 1M refugees a year across.

    And that's why one should welcome Corbyn, Labour, the new Spanish government and the shake up in Germany as the centre right loses a grip. We need a new philosophy and new approaches for this post crash era.

    We absolutely need a genuine debate about the benefits of a single market when one of the outcomes of freedom of movement (and globalisation) has been to keep wages down for 20-30 years. This is not to be a Luddite and fight progress - simply a recognition that in a democracy the whole population has a vote - and there's a reason for that.
  • Net emigration for the EU ?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Net emigration for the EU ?

    Net immigration from the EU was reported as down 75% to 74,000 for YTD (from 300,000 pa in 2016).

    And potentially negative for one quarter earlier this year - so that becomes net emigration to the EU27! Cant find the link.

    A mix of sterling going down, uncertainty and bad PR is changing patterns before we even leave the EU.
  • No, I think you just shouldn’t generalise all leavers as the same. Simple as that.
  • https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Nrsjgr968

    The full video is even worse. Proper, proper dickheads who I might share a nationality with but I suspect not much more and I would be embarrassed to share any views with.
  • edited December 2018
    Quite, I’ve got no problem with the post above in response to a specific video giving clear context.

    The post however implies that’s he’s been told he shouldn’t criticise in that vein, which is misleading.

    The same poster has used the same or similar attacks in more general terms, which doesn’t help matters and it is those which some of us are saying he shouldn’t be doing.

  • seth plum said:

    se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    Scoham said:
    It was more the irony of him using a European protest symbol to protest that he isn’t European that I thought was delicious.
    Sadly, the irony will always be lost on these thickos!
    The other irony was standing in front of the City of London boundry marker to make his little speech, that’s a part of the country that massively benefits from the freedom of movement of services (and people) that the EU brings and now powers the nations economy.
    Ireland is part of the British Isles. I double dare you to start refering to people from Ireland as British.
    There is some debate over the use the term "British Isles", and quite a few people from Ireland (at least in the North Eastern corner of the island are routinely described as British).

    It's ll a question of perspective.
    Or the new thing about self identification.
    I was born in Erith, lived, studied and worked (and paid taxes and voted) in London all my life, but I am 100% not English, I certainly would not admit to being British either.
    In terms of self identification I am glad to think of myself as European or an internationalist even. I feel a great sense of shame and embarrassment to be thought of as British with the associations made in this day and age.
    That's funny, because mine is very similar (born in Bexley, lived & worked in London & s/e all my life) and see myself as 100% English.....not even British (give the jocks independence I say)

    No wonder why we see Brexit so very differently.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited December 2018
    The really worrying thing is you expect that bollocks from shitemags like The Sun/Mail/Daily Star, but The Telegraph and Times are supposed to be 'real' papers.
  • they have appeared as real headlines but how many are fake news?
  • The really worrying thing is you expect that bollocks from shitemags like The Sun/Mail/Daily Star, but The Telegraph and Times are supposed to be 'real' papers.

    The Times is the one that really gets me. Pure reactionary positioning masquerading as the voice of neutral reason. That said, the FT is the only paper with any sort of balanced perspective right now
  • https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C5Nrsjgr968

    The full video is even worse. Proper, proper dickheads who I might share a nationality with but I suspect not much more and I would be embarrassed to share any views with.

    That video is really horrible.
  • Brussels ban on pints of shandy – The Times

    At least they had some good ideas!
  • seth plum said:

    se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    Scoham said:
    It was more the irony of him using a European protest symbol to protest that he isn’t European that I thought was delicious.
    Sadly, the irony will always be lost on these thickos!
    The other irony was standing in front of the City of London boundry marker to make his little speech, that’s a part of the country that massively benefits from the freedom of movement of services (and people) that the EU brings and now powers the nations economy.
    Ireland is part of the British Isles. I double dare you to start refering to people from Ireland as British.
    There is some debate over the use the term "British Isles", and quite a few people from Ireland (at least in the North Eastern corner of the island are routinely described as British).

    It's ll a question of perspective.
    Or the new thing about self identification.
    I was born in Erith, lived, studied and worked (and paid taxes and voted) in London all my life, but I am 100% not English, I certainly would not admit to being British either.
    In terms of self identification I am glad to think of myself as European or an internationalist even. I feel a great sense of shame and embarrassment to be thought of as British with the associations made in this day and age.
    That's funny, because mine is very similar (born in Bexley, lived & worked in London & s/e all my life) and see myself as 100% English.....not even British (give the jocks independence I say)

    No wonder why we see Brexit so very differently.
    Interesting how we all see things like this differently,

    I see myself as a Londoner
    Then an Englishman
    Then a Brit/UK


    If someone asked me where I was from I don’t think I’d ever say Europe, depending who was asking it’d be either London or England or maybe Britain.
  • Net emigration for the EU ?

    Net immigration from the EU was reported as down 75% to 74,000 for YTD (from 300,000 pa in 2016).

    And potentially negative for one quarter earlier this year - so that becomes net emigration to the EU27! Cant find the link.

    A mix of sterling going down, uncertainty and bad PR is changing patterns before we even leave the EU.
    I thought as much. You do like a fib at times.
  • The Irish Government have published an interesting document on its contingency planning for no-deal. I actually think it's really useful (even at 131 pages), as it's an easy introduction to what's happening in the EU27 and, probably, the UK.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!