advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... X

Status
Not open for further replies.
"When it becomes serious, you have to lie."

“Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?,”

"We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back."


Jean-Claude Juncker, ex-president of the European Commission.

(And you didn't even get to hire him, he was appointed by Frau Merkel.)

I've got a list, oft quoted, of the actual crooks, and those who have been investigated, usually for fraud or misuse of funds, currently in the top (unelected) positions in the EC. Shall I post it again?

And they're not even competent.
I've got a list of crooks. And they're a lot closer to home. And a lot more crooked. And the little Junker quote you've scraped seems innocuous beside lying to the queen, lying to the electorate, proroguing parliament etc, etc ad infinitum.
ET, the sovereignty argument is so comprehensively blown out of the water by recent events as well as project fear predictions, I can only assume you're sticking with it out of nostalgia.
 
Interesting, if I am reading this graph correctly, then in 2019, net migration from Non-EU countries, was higher than it ever has been from the EU directly.

https://public.tableau.com/views/Ne...=1&:display_count=y&:eek:rigin=viz_share_link
Correct. Also there was more non EU immigration then EU between 2000 and 2012; and non EU immigration, which we control completely, has risen since 2013 (and was mostly rising prior to that). Because we are taking back control.
 
We had just as much say in that as we did the implementation of everything following the June 2016 vote. The Tories on here say "you had 3 GEs to have your say on how to implement Brexit", you are now saying we didn't get a say in implementing UK policy on FOM between 2000 and 2015. We did, we had however many GEs. You can't have it both ways. Either a GE is an acceptable means of "having your say" or it's not.
I acknowledge. I should have focused on the period under New Labour.
It is clear that the Tories got back into power partly on a platform of controlling migration levels.
It didn't seem to work. They never achieved the goals they set. Is that an example of "having my say"?
Do you think the Brexit vote will change the nature and source of future migration?
 
Now, they won't come here If they want to tour in the EU.

^This. Part of my income comes from working with US bands touring Europe. Previous clients with plans to tour later this year include Beck, Ben Harper, Sparks. They will use European engineers, or bring US engineers over now.
Also, most large British based sound rental companies are now owned by US companies. They will move to Europe. Not because of equipment carnets, but issues of providing technicians into Europe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PsB
Correct. Also there was more non EU immigration then EU between 2000 and 2012; and non EU immigration, which we control completely, has risen since 2013 (and was mostly rising prior to that). Because we are taking back control.
You'd almost think the increase in migration was driven by big business.
I think it's a reasonable premise.
 
It always seems to me that our Brexity friends at pfm are united by a sneery mistrust of foreigners. I’ve stopped visiting this thread because of it. I find it most unsavoury.

Our verbose friend decries them as crooks ignoring the criminal acts of the government closer to home. The more bellicose of the bunch makes like Alan Whicker at the golf-club sneering about our ‘German friends’ when it’s blatant he sees them as anything but. The use of whatever he can scrape off the internet seldom fails to diminish that argument.

Then of course there’s the complete failure of any Brexity person to provide even a smidgeon of benefit beyond something based on the nationalistic dog whistle of ‘Taking back control.’

Come on, let’s be having it. No pompous verbosity pretending you’re a Daily Telegraph leader writer, and no Daily Mail/UKIP screen scrapes.

What have we won? Provide an executive summary. Bonus points for using bullet points for concision. Exceptional performance would be to provide meaningful data to support your assertions.

Is there anything to offer except bullshit?
 
Correct. Also there was more non EU immigration then EU between 2000 and 2012; and non EU immigration, which we control completely, has risen since 2013 (and was mostly rising prior to that). Because we are taking back control.
It’s remarkable how many times this has to be repeated, along with the fallacy that we had no control over EU immigration. It’s part of the set of other false beliefs that are best summarised as we will keep all the old benefits while no longer obeying the rules.
The other chestnut that there wasn’t enough infrastructure provision- schools, NHS, housing to cater for EU migrants- it begs the question: what are Jenrick and the others doing to plan for the hundreds of thousands of Hong Kong Chinese his government has given permanent residence rights to in the U.K.? It’s going to get Kipper nostrils flaring, to put it mildly.
 
I acknowledge. I should have focused on the period under New Labour.
It is clear that the Tories got back into power partly on a platform of controlling migration levels.
You had the same opportunity to vote pre 2010 as you did after. If immigration was a problem for you or anyone else the parties had it in their manifesto for us to choose if we wanted.

It didn't seem to work. They never achieved the goals they set. Is that an example of "having my say"?
It's about as much say as you ever get. If you get the candidate you vote for, well done. I only occasionally do. My constituency voted Remain, we then got a Brexit yes-man as an MP who does whatever the whip tells him.

Do you think the Brexit vote will change the nature and source of future migration?
It already has, look at the graph linked above. Of course that will carry on. We need immigrants, they come over here to do work, regardless of what you may read in the Daily Hate.
 
You'd almost think the increase in migration was driven by big business.
I think it's a reasonable premise.
If there is work, they will come. If there isn't, they won't. Don't let's forget that in the 80s when we had 3M unemployed our brickies went to Germany.
 
It always seems to me that our Brexity friends at pfm are united by a sneery mistrust of foreigners. I’ve stopped visiting this thread because of it. I find it most unsavoury.

Our verbose friend decries them as crooks ignoring the criminal acts of the government closer to home. The more bellicose of the bunch makes like Alan Whicker at the golf-club sneering about our ‘German friends’ when it’s blatant he sees them as anything but. The use of whatever he can scrape off the internet seldom fails to diminish that argument.

Then of course there’s the complete failure of any Brexity person to provide even a smidgeon of benefit beyond something based on the nationalistic dog whistle of ‘Taking back control.’

Come on, let’s be having it. No pompous verbosity pretending you’re a Daily Telegraph leader writer, and no Daily Mail/UKIP screen scrapes.

What have we won? Provide an executive summary. Bonus points for using bullet points for concision. Exceptional performance would be to provide meaningful data to support your assertions.

Is there anything to offer except bullshit?

Personally, I find staring at blank sheets of paper a tad boring after a very short time.
I also tire of the use of 'our 'Friends' in the usual part - meaning the exact opposite, so I just ignore.
 
The other chestnut that there wasn’t enough infrastructure provision- schools, NHS, housing to cater for EU migrants- it begs the question: what are Jenrick and the others doing to plan for the 5.4 million Hong Kong Chinese his government has given permanent residence rights to in the U.K.?
More than that; the no-infrastructure gag is just so obviously stupid. We had it reeled out for the Syrian refugees coming the Bradford, FFS. "There's no infrastructure! Where will we put them all?" Do you know how many were taken, by Bradford, a city of 250,000 people? 250. Yes, two hundred and fifty. So that's one new person for every thousand. 5 coach loads. Of course we all know that Bradford has no infrastructure, other than, well, railway stations, a motorway, a large hospital, a university, schools with tens of thousands of children in them, several churches and mosques, a city centre in need of considerable redevelopment with large numbers of empty buildings, and absolutely nowhere to house 5 coachloads of people, much less shops willing to sell them food and clothes. As a friend of mine memorably said: "Blimey. 250 people? Holme Wood (a predominantly white working class estate in SE Bradford) generates that many children 9 months after any wet night when there's no football on."
 
More than that; the no-infrastructure gag is just so obviously stupid. We had it reeled out for the Syrian refugees coming the Bradford, FFS. "There's no infrastructure! Where will we put them all?" Do you know how many were taken, by Bradford, a city of 250,000 people? 250. Yes, two hundred and fifty. So that's one new person for every thousand. 5 coach loads. Of course we all know that Bradford has no infrastructure, other than, well, railway stations, a motorway, a large hospital, a university, schools with tens of thousands of children in them, several churches and mosques, a city centre in need of considerable redevelopment with large numbers of empty buildings, and absolutely nowhere to house 5 coachloads of people, much less shops willing to sell them food and clothes. As a friend of mine memorably said: "Blimey. 250 people? Holme Wood (a predominantly white working class estate in SE Bradford) generates that many children 9 months after any wet night when there's no football on."
Makes you wonder how Germany managed the best part of a million in about 6 months.
 
Tell me, Mike, does the facilitation of (reasonably) frictionless trade require zero effective democracy, 7 presidents and all the accoutrements of an empire?
We've been through this several times before, EV.

First, your number of 7 presidents is far, far too low. The EU has a lot more than that. Still, the real number is probably lower than the number of Lords in the UK, so there. (Why does a middling country like the UK need 817 Lords and Ladies, including 25 "not currently eligible" (as if any of them were ever elected)? Feudal legacy, profligate pomp, or just a dysfunctional (and not very democratic) way of cobbling together an upper chamber?)

Second, there is plenty of effective democracy across the EU, both within its member states but also in the way decision makers within EU institutions are selected and overseen. The members of the European Council are all elected, MEPs are all elected, together they pick, confirm and oversee the Commission to work on its areas of competence, etc.

Please make up your mind once and for all. Is the EU essentially:
- An empire, evil or otherwise, in which case a lack of democracy is surely a given, and complaints about accoutrements (good word, that) like imperial pretension, a standing army, flag, hymn etc. are just part of the package
- A fledgling federal state, in which case you would expect things like a common currency, a standing army and other accoutrements to develop over time, as well as democratic tools to control these
- A technocracy set up just to manage a specific set of common interests of its member states (in which case you can criticize a lack of efficiency but complaining about a lack of things such as a proper standing army is a bit daft, and the democracy issue becomes less relevant)
- Or is it something else?
You know already what the EU isn't: it is not a free trade zone or a nation-state.
 
I've got a list of crooks. And they're a lot closer to home. And a lot more crooked..

It always seems to me that our Brexity friends at pfm are united by a sneery mistrust of foreigners. I’ve stopped visiting this thread because of it. I find it most unsavoury.

Our verbose friend decries them as crooks ignoring the criminal acts of the government closer to home.

Lordsummit, I find your snipe pretty offensive. It has nothing whatsoever to do with foreigners. My mistrust (sneery is standard posture for the pfm remainer, just glance upthread) is reserved for anyone who has the keys to excessive power without the possibility of democratic sanction. The EU generally and the EC/ECJ in particular have been helping themselves to excessive power for 3 decades, and there is no democratic sanction whatsoever, because they are not elected.

The manifold shortcomings of the current government here will be subject to the ballot box, and if they are found to have been wanting or indeed bent, they'll be sacked and parked in front of the courts, in that order. And on current form, they're cerainly lined up for the former.

What we desperately lack at the moment is an opposition to the government to make sure they are. It isn't the job of the bloody EU to provide that, and never has been.
 
It has nothing whatsoever to do with foreigners.
For you, possibly. For many of the 17M who voted as you did, it most certainly is. We all know this, it's undeniable. So you can claim the moral high ground if you wish, but it doesn't change the drivers behind a lot of the other 16,999,999.
 
We've been through this several times before, EV.

First, your number of 7 presidents is far, far too low. The EU has a lot more than that. Still, the real number is probably lower than the number of Lords in the UK, so there. (Why does a middling country like the UK need 817 Lords and Ladies, including 25 "not currently eligible" (as if any of them were ever elected)? Feudal legacy, profligate pomp, or just a dysfunctional (and not very democratic) way of cobbling together an upper chamber?)

Second, there is plenty of effective democracy across the EU, both within its member states but also in the way decision makers within EU institutions are selected and overseen. The members of the European Council are all elected, MEPs are all elected, together they pick, confirm and oversee the Commission to work on its areas of competence, etc.

Please make up your mind once and for all. Is the EU essentially:
- An empire, evil or otherwise, in which case a lack of democracy is surely a given, and complaints about accoutrements (good word, that) like imperial pretension, a standing army, flag, hymn etc. are just part of the package
- A fledgling federal state, in which case you would expect things like a common currency, a standing army and other accoutrements to develop over time, as well as democratic tools to control these
- A technocracy set up just to manage a specific set of common interests of its member states (in which case you can criticize a lack of efficiency but complaining about a lack of things such as a proper standing army is a bit daft, and the democracy issue becomes less relevant)
- Or is it something else?
You know already what the EU isn't: it is not a free trade zone or a nation-state.
Your ‘first’ is whataboutism.

Your ‘second’ reinforces that the European Commission is an unelected entity.

Your last block missed the one that matters most in 2021...
- A bloc of which the UK is not a member.
 
Steve, I'm not going to be drawn into the immigration bit of this argument, but I should point out that you are the only person here who has come close to acknowledging the issues of people who were directly affected in their communities by the very rapid increase in EU immigration which commenced under Blair.

If rapid immigration was an issue for these people, then it was a legitimate one, and they should have been heard by their political representatives. If the politicos didn't want to listen, then it was bound to come back and bite them on the arse sooner or later. If that sense of disenfranchisement crystallised in Brexit, they have only themselves to blame.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top