Brexit and the Consequences

[cantagril]

As W.C. Fields said, “If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull****.”

Dead on! As far as this thread goes, I'm infrequently dazzled but constantly baffled:cheesy:

 

[cantagril]

What he's saying is, I don't know sh1t

Pithy.... but not much to get one's teeth into on a slow trading day. Couldn't you try rambling on a bit for entertainment purposes?

 

[Atilla]

so, are you saying that the country could not function without immigrants filling the above positions or its just easier and cheaper to use them as opposed to training our own. ?

Furthermore, the Syrian , Iraq immigrants will have been in the Eu coming up to 3,4 years now ? And still coming, all elegable for EU passports after 5 years ? Correct me if I'm wrong....on top of that, Turkey is getting a step closer to EU membership. Every day and could well join within 5-10 years, now would you like to estimate how many Of those mentioned are elegable to come and live in the UK ? Also would they be elegable for the following ...free education, free NHS, housing, etc ...and you wonder why there's a strain on public services, look forward 10 years, what's it going to be like. ? ?

I'm saying we're better in Europe with the four fundamental freedoms.

Yes, we do need migration controls and we can halve that number now if it was possible.

Migration has been flirted with in every election by Tories and placing business and jobs and services before reducing migration numbers has led us to where we are today.

Subsequently, with an aging population and declining birth rates yes the numbers don't add up as in another 15-20 years time the social tax burden and impending pension crises can't be sustained without positive migration inflows.

 

[counter_violent]

Pithy.... but not much to get one's teeth into on a slow trading day. Couldn't you try rambling on a bit for entertainment purposes?

I'll leave that to our "resident rambler".

Enough material there for a full conference.

 

[mike.]

I'm saying we're better in Europe with the four fundamental freedoms.

Yes, we do need migration controls and we can halve that number now if it was possible.

Migration has been flirted with in every election by Tories and placing business and jobs and services before reducing migration numbers has led us to where we are today.

Subsequently, with an aging population and declining birth rates yes the numbers don't add up as in another 15-20 years time the social tax burden and impending pension crises can't be sustained without positive migration inflows.

We have probably gone full circle now, debating issues that were risen at the start of the thread, I fear we will never agree on most of the issues regarding the EU but I'm glad talks are underway and we're leaving....No doubt there will be many a argument and counter argument while the process unfolds....But no regrets here I'm afraid..

 

[timsk]

Hi dbp,

You're speaking from a position of ignorance of what it's like to live in the US. I suggest you not pursue it. The big, mean old Brussels approach does not lend itself to clarity of thought, particularly when making comparisons to what one believes are the conditions in the US.

Apologies, I should have commenced that sentence with 'My guess is that . . . (you have it easy compared to EU members who are immersed in an ever deepening quagmire of bureaucracy.) My mistake. That said, I can assure you my thoughts are perfectly clear!

That is unfortunately correct. But it should boil down to what is objectively real. And by that I don't mean manipulating data in order to achieve confirmation bias.

Start with any sentence that begins "immigrants are . . .".

Again, I'm afraid you've lost me. Are you saying that your perception and beliefs are based on what is objectively real and that mine (c_v's, mike's and fellow Brexiteers) are not? And who is manipulating data in order to achieve confirmation bias? Let me guess: Atilla! Lastly, immigrants are . . . people who come to live permanently in a foreign country?
Tim.

 

[dbphoenix]

(you have it easy compared to EU members who are immersed in an ever deepening quagmire of bureaucracy.)

Your perception, but it isn't necessarily true.

Again, I'm afraid you've lost me. Are you saying that your perception and beliefs are based on what is objectively real and that mine (c_v's, mike's and fellow Brexiteers) are not? And who is manipulating data in order to achieve confirmation bias? Let me guess: Atilla! Lastly, immigrants are . . . people who come to live permanently in a foreign country?
Tim.

This is not a decision-making body, so who really cares unless one finds debate more interesting than rants? Be that as it may, it isn't possible to determine whether A's or B's statements are based on objective data unless that data is provided. Most of what's said here begins with I think, in my opinion, I believe, it seems to me that, it's been my experience that and so forth, and while all of that may be interesting, it has no bearing on whether or not the argument is sound.

And, yes, one can say that immigrants are people who come to live permanently in a foreign country, but that's not how they're being defined here, One could search for "leaches", "parasites", "feckless" and so forth, which cast a different light on the subject of what immigrants "are".

 

[dbphoenix]

Pithy.... but not much to get one's teeth into on a slow trading day. Couldn't you try rambling on a bit for entertainment purposes?

It's an avoidance mechanism. But this is after all only a trading forum. If you want entertainment, try Yahoo Comments. Or comments anywhere, as far as that goes.

 

[Jason101]

Loans secured on what exactly ? Any loan requires a financial history in this country, Banks would not lend to low paid immigrants in rented accommodation , which is the majority of lmigration.

I don't mean to be rude but they are usually called mortgages, credit cards, car loans.
I find it quite scary that you have such strong feelings with very little knowledge.
EU citizens (up until A50, was triggered) could get a mortgage just like anyone else.

 

[dbphoenix]

"Shifting Dollars From Poor to Rich Is a Key Part of the Senate Health Bill"

Headline from the New York Times, and it could well be restated as "Shifting Dollars From Poor to Rich Is a Key Part of the (fill in the blank)". I suggest that those who are wedded to Brexit think about this with regard to their arguments for and against.

 

[cantagril]

It's an avoidance mechanism. But this is after all only a trading forum. If you want entertainment, try Yahoo Comments. Or comments anywhere, as far as that goes.

A Trading Forum, indeed! I would never have guessed.....

 

[counter_violent]

It's an avoidance mechanism. But this is after all only a trading forum. If you want entertainment, try Yahoo Comments. Or comments anywhere, as far as that goes.

Avoidance mechanism too funny.

This is what happens when One side fails to convince. They become ever more bitter, twisted and hostile.

Here are some classic examples of bitters.

Sturgeon
Blair
Major
Hessletine
Salmond
Clegg
Farron
Carney
Atilla
DB

Need I go on.

 

[Jason101]

Official figures vary based on agenda, so I'm speaking from personal experience ...low paid car valeters, car hire non office based workers, cleaning staff, zero hours contracts in most factories like sports direct for example all low paid immigrant workers....fact.

Unbelievable, is there any point in having this conversation at all.

 

[Jason101]

Which is why capitalism must collapse, in the end. With an aging population and a declining currency, pensions are becoming worthless.

The answer from optimists is "something else will come up". What will that "something" be? I don't know but, then,I'm not a politician or an economist.

Hopefully, I shall be looking down, from above, before that happens, but happen, it will.

One big ponzi scheme.
And they sent Maydoff to prison?

 

[dbphoenix]

Avoidance mechanism too funny.

This is what happens when One side fails to convince. They become ever more bitter, twisted and hostile.

Here are some classic examples of bitters.

Sturgeon
Blair
Major
Hessletine
Salmond
Clegg
Farron
Carney
Atilla
DB

Need I go on.

Once you've added "cv", not really, though the list could go on. And on.

Your first error is in devoting all energies toward "convincing" rather than informing. By doing so you develop a stake in being right. And that tends to prevent your entertaining any other point of view. And lays the groundwork toward becoming "bitter, twisted, and hostile".

 

[dbphoenix]

And they sent Maydoff to prison?

It was easy to do so, and it made everyone look virtuous. But then Roger Ailes made millions off his criminal conduct. However, he did die, so perhaps there is such a thing as karma after all. Though that doesn't account for Dick Cheney.

Oh well.

 

[timsk]

Hi dbp - again,

Your perception, but it isn't necessarily true.

Fair enough. But, by the same token, it doesn't mean that it's false or that your perception is true. It cuts both ways. I gave specific examples that speak for themselves re. EU bureaucracy. If you'd care to outline the possible justification for over 12,000 laws pertaining to milk - do please enlighten us!

This is not a decision-making body, so who really cares unless one finds debate more interesting than rants? Be that as it may, it isn't possible to determine whether A's or B's statements are based on objective data unless that data is provided. Most of what's said here begins with I think, in my opinion, I believe, it seems to me that, it's been my experience that and so forth, and while all of that may be interesting, it has no bearing on whether or not the argument is sound.

So, what does have bearing on whether or not the argument is sound?

And, yes, one can say that immigrants are people who come to live permanently in a foreign country, but that's not how they're being defined here, One could search for "leaches", "parasites", "feckless" and so forth, which cast a different light on the subject of what immigrants "are".

Well, I'm certainly not defining immigrants in those terms and I'm not aware of others doing so either. c_v used the word 'feckless' in a broad context describing the transfer of wealth - but that's got nothing to do with immigrants. I'm on record on this forum saying that I value immigrants for their cultural and economic contribution and, to the best of my knowledge, most Brexiteers on here - and certainly everyone within my personal acquaintance - agrees wholeheartedly with that point of view.
Tim.

 

[dbphoenix]

So, what does have bearing on whether or not the argument is sound?

Objective data. If there are in fact 12000 laws pertaining to milk and that fact justifies leaving the EU, then enough said. However, one must be careful with regard to whether he's seeking justification or an excuse.

 

[counter_violent]

Hi dbp - again,

Fair enough. But, by the same token, it doesn't mean that it's false or that your perception is true. It cuts both ways. I gave specific examples that speak for themselves re. EU bureaucracy. If you'd care to outline the possible justification for over 12,000 laws pertaining to milk - do please enlighten us!


So, what does have bearing on whether or not the argument is sound?


Well, I'm certainly not defining immigrants in those terms and I'm not aware of others doing so either. c_v used the word 'feckless' in a broad context describing the transfer of wealth - but that's got nothing to do with immigrants. I'm on record on this forum saying that I value immigrants for their cultural and economic contribution and, to the best of my knowledge, most Brexiteers on here - and certainly everyone within my personal acquaintance - agrees wholeheartedly with that point of view.
Tim.

Everyone will have a multitude of different reasons regarding the debate.

I have no problem with immigration in general, except to say that it is way too high. But I have a massive problem with free movement, uncontrolled unskilled immigration, for all the reasons discussed previously.

 

[timsk]

Hi again dbp,

. . . However, one must be careful with regard to whether he's seeking justification or an excuse.

At last, a point we can both agree on!

I can't speak for others obviously, I just know how I arrived at the conclusions that I have. My default starting point three months or so prior to last year's referendum was rooted firmly in the remain camp - largely for the same reasons as many others who voted that way. I like Europe - I go there two or three times a year - and I like Europeans. Why would I not want to remain part of the big happy family? So, at that time, I was probably guilty of looking for excuses to vote remain. Unfortunately, the more I investigated the EU and the claims made for and against remaining in it, the more evidence I uncovered that not only justified voting leave, it demanded it.
Tim.