I love the EU because...
Discussion
oyster said:
SKP555
I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
A good post, but one that perhaps still does not address all the reasons why the majority of voters in the UK voted to leave. and in some cases it does not address the reality of the relationship between the UK and EU.I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
1. `Easy' access to 27+ plus other countries to live and work. It is fine to have easy access to other countries `if' there is work there, but the truth of the matter is that in many EU countries there `is' no work, which is why they have colossal levels of youth unemployment, and hundreds of thousands of EU nationals are trying to get out of the EU, and into the UK every year, despite knowing the UK is leaving the EU.
Regardless of any employment rules the EU lays down, many EU states will still look after their own people first, when times are hard, (as they in many EU states) and get rid of immigrant workers first, A engineer friend worked for Airbus Industrie, and he, and many of his UK colleagues were given the sack, as soon as any issues regarding employment levels arose, despite being better qualified than many of the indigenous workers.
It is only the UK that does not look after its own first.
The influx into the UK also makes it harder for the indigenous population, as they will have to compete with an extra 330 thousand plus people a year from the EU alone, all looking for the same places in schools, and universities, as well as jobs, homes, health care and transport, which we are repeatedly being told that is at breaking point. Many of those coming in who are prepared to work herder for longer for less than the indigenous population. Only 980 thousand UK nationals live, and work in the 3.39 `million' square miles of the EU, but 3 million EU nationals have come to live and work in the 98 `thousand' square miles of the UK. How long do you suppose a country the size of the UK can cope with and absorb, that ratio of people coming in, compared to people leaving the UK?
2. Not a single person in the UK had, or has been given the chance to vote on whether they wanted to be in the EU. They were only given a vote on whether they wanted to be in a European trading bloc known as the EEC, The EEC changed `itself' into a completely different animal in 1993, and for many this was a point of deep contention, which made many angry. The UK citizen has only had two votes regarding the EEC one when they voted in in 1975, and the second in 2016 when they voted out. The (possibly illegal) actions of various UK governments regarding the EU in the interim, does not constitute consent of the people of the UK.
3. The age factor, could indeed be a factor, since given point 2 above, many who were old enough to vote in 1975, feel angry that they were hoodwinked into voting to join the EEC, and on far less information than was available for the 2016 referendum. That it changed `itself' into the undemocratic, money grasping, monster known as the EU that none of them wanted or were allowed to vote on, is possibly why many older people voted leave.
4. The EU is all about money, which is why they want to impose a 60 billion pound fine on the UK for leaving. They don't like the fact that its second largest net contributor of funds is leaving. If you can show me how the UK, despite being the EU`s second largest contributor of funds into the EU has the same level of influence over its course and business as Germany and France, I would be extremely interested, Everyone knows that as far as the EU is concerned it is Germany and France that call all the shots. If the EU were to apportion influence in the EU, in line with what each member state is prepared to pay in, the situation might be fairer for the UK. but this is not what happens in the EU. The UK has lost votes in EU matters, far more than it has ever won. With the UK having a 24 billion trade deficit with the EU in 2016 alone, and for just about every year since the UK joined the EEC, the UK is paying the EU 10.8 billion pounds a year for the privilege of letting the EU sell more of its goods and services into the UK (making their business and factories stronger) that the UK is able to sell into the EU. Just because some UK business are able to make money selling into the EU does not mean that all are, as the UK, steel, aluminium, and cement industries have all declined following EU membership, not to mention the UK fishing industry which has been decimated by EU membership leading to the decline of many UK coastal communities.
5. the UK has always had diverse culture, which has made it what it is today. but where whole communities are swamped with an influx of people (not just from the EU) with very different cultures, in a very short space of time, it naturally made, and makes the indigenous population fearful for their own way of life.
Far too often the rights and culture of local people have been virtually ignored, with many being branded racist, when they dared to express their concerns over this, or at least that is how many of them felt, which is again why many voted leave in the 2016 referendum. None of these points were addressed by those who advocated remain in the run up to the 2106 referendum.
Vocal Minority said:
Yes....I know I am in a minority.
I am not trying to change anyone's minds - Im accepting the result - it I what it is.
You wanted to leave. Fine. You got your way.
Why can I just not be left with my opinion. Why does every brexiteer still want to tell remainers they are wrong, despite getting their way?! Do you not feel like you have won until we beg your forgiveness for disagreeing?
Fair enough, that's really not my intention . I was reacting initially to your comment that "you liked the idea of being able to pop over and visit the French" as if that was no longer going to be possible, or wasn't before. I am not trying to change anyone's minds - Im accepting the result - it I what it is.
You wanted to leave. Fine. You got your way.
Why can I just not be left with my opinion. Why does every brexiteer still want to tell remainers they are wrong, despite getting their way?! Do you not feel like you have won until we beg your forgiveness for disagreeing?
Pan Pan Pan said:
oyster said:
SKP555
I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
A good post, but one that perhaps still does not address all the reasons why the majority of voters in the UK voted to leave. and in some cases it does not address the reality of the relationship between the UK and EU.I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
1. `Easy' access to 27+ plus other countries to live and work. It is fine to have easy access to other countries `if' there is work there, but the truth of the matter is that in many EU countries there `is' no work, which is why they have colossal levels of youth unemployment, and hundreds of thousands of EU nationals are trying to get out of the EU, and into the UK every year, despite knowing the UK is leaving the EU.
Regardless of any employment rules the EU lays down, many EU states will still look after their own people first, when times are hard, (as they in many EU states) and get rid of immigrant workers first, A engineer friend worked for Airbus Industrie, and he, and many of his UK colleagues were given the sack, as soon as any issues regarding employment levels arose, despite being better qualified than many of the indigenous workers.
It is only the UK that does not look after its own first.
The influx into the UK also makes it harder for the indigenous population, as they will have to compete with an extra 330 thousand plus people a year from the EU alone, all looking for the same places in schools, and universities, as well as jobs, homes, health care and transport, which we are repeatedly being told that is at breaking point. Many of those coming in who are prepared to work herder for longer for less than the indigenous population. Only 980 thousand UK nationals live, and work in the 3.39 `million' square miles of the EU, but 3 million EU nationals have come to live and work in the 98 `thousand' square miles of the UK. How long do you suppose a country the size of the UK can cope with and absorb, that ratio of people coming in, compared to people leaving the UK?
2. Not a single person in the UK had, or has been given the chance to vote on whether they wanted to be in the EU. They were only given a vote on whether they wanted to be in a European trading bloc known as the EEC, The EEC changed `itself' into a completely different animal in 1993, and for many this was a point of deep contention, which made many angry. The UK citizen has only had two votes regarding the EEC one when they voted in in 1975, and the second in 2016 when they voted out. The (possibly illegal) actions of various UK governments regarding the EU in the interim, does not constitute consent of the people of the UK.
3. The age factor, could indeed be a factor, since given point 2 above, many who were old enough to vote in 1975, feel angry that they were hoodwinked into voting to join the EEC, and on far less information than was available for the 2016 referendum. That it changed `itself' into the undemocratic, money grasping, monster known as the EU that none of them wanted or were allowed to vote on, is possibly why many older people voted leave.
4. The EU is all about money, which is why they want to impose a 60 billion pound fine on the UK for leaving. They don't like the fact that its second largest net contributor of funds is leaving. If you can show me how the UK, despite being the EU`s second largest contributor of funds into the EU has the same level of influence over its course and business as Germany and France, I would be extremely interested, Everyone knows that as far as the EU is concerned it is Germany and France that call all the shots. If the EU were to apportion influence in the EU, in line with what each member state is prepared to pay in, the situation might be fairer for the UK. but this is not what happens in the EU. The UK has lost votes in EU matters, far more than it has ever won. With the UK having a 24 billion trade deficit with the EU in 2016 alone, and for just about every year since the UK joined the EEC, the UK is paying the EU 10.8 billion pounds a year for the privilege of letting the EU sell more of its goods and services into the UK (making their business and factories stronger) that the UK is able to sell into the EU. Just because some UK business are able to make money selling into the EU does not mean that all are, as the UK, steel, aluminium, and cement industries have all declined following EU membership, not to mention the UK fishing industry which has been decimated by EU membership leading to the decline of many UK coastal communities.
5. the UK has always had diverse culture, which has made it what it is today. but where whole communities are swamped with an influx of people (not just from the EU) with very different cultures, in a very short space of time, it naturally made, and makes the indigenous population fearful for their own way of life.
Far too often the rights and culture of local people have been virtually ignored, with many being branded racist, when they dared to express their concerns over this, or at least that is how many of them felt, which is again why many voted leave in the 2016 referendum. None of these points were addressed by those who advocated remain in the run up to the 2106 referendum.
I think that alone goes to show that people aren't at polar extremes of the Brexit divide.
The blue flag waving loonies are in a tiny minority, as are the mouth-frothing foreigner-haters.
4x4Tyke said:
gruffalo said:
The same can be said for the leave argument, Econmics, human rights , etc!
It depends on your perspective.
No it cannot, the economy has suffered and will suffer more, we will all lose rights and security will be diminished to boot. All over an irrational hatred of foreigners.It depends on your perspective.
Early Doors One Month After Brexit (DT)
Unemployment is down, prices are steady, shoppers are confident and the government ran a budget surplus in July. The first economic data for July – the month following the Brexit referendum – was published this week, and shows no signs of an immediate economic collapse. It is early days and a slowdown is still expected, but the data are reassuring so far.
Slowdown, ho ho ho.
Longer-Term Position is Much Better with Boom not Bust e.g. Six Months Later (DE)
FTSE 100 hits new record high in Britain's Brexit economy boom as the positive economic news continues to flow following the Brexit vote.
The Future of the UK Economy Is Looking Bright(TS)
UK set for Brexit boom in 2017 as top business bosses have shown a boost in confidence in the UK economy.
Security scaremongering was quickly debunked by experienced security professionals and we saw headlines after the security porkies such as "Ex head of MI6 argues Brexit would not harm security" also "Brexit won't harm UK security, says US former spy chief" and perhaps best of all "Brexit will NOT damage UK security, admits EU". Just like the 3 million unemployed, the instant and year-long recession, the multi-£billion emergency budget and the sky falling in, it's baseless scaremongering.
As to future rights, as that crystal ball is performing so well what are the numbers for tomorrow's Euromillions? We can keep it between ourselves, nobody will notice.
March 29th, a good day in the offing and the Leaving, including for the UK economy.
danllama said:
4x4Tyke said:
No it cannot, the economy has suffered and will suffer more, we will all lose rights and security will be diminished to boot. All over an irrational hatred of foreigners.
wtf is wrong with people like you?? Serious malfunction in your head.Problem Solved
Pan Pan Pan said:
crankedup said:
some mention has been made regarding freedom of movement of people being beneficial. Agreed it has been of benifit to the UK economy, that is not disputed. However this has come at a cost, a personal cost to millions of workers, mainly in the farming industries, hospitality, catering and building. The influx of cheap labour has suppressed and reduced wages within these industries for many years.
Perhaps these disaffected workers decided to vote 'leave' on the basis of the growing low wage economy within the UK.
It is argued that the lower paid jobs cannot be filled by the indigenous workers, perhaps the low wage on offer acts as a deterrent even though the Government subsidise this low pay from our taxes.
I agree with our PM, the UK needs to be a fairer more inclusive Country for everybody, not
The problem seems to be that quite a large number of the indigenous population has seen the influx of people from outside of the UK (many of whom are prepared to work harder, for longer, for less) as the ideal opportunity to live a life on benefits, paid for from taxes provided by all those who want to work for a living. Perhaps these disaffected workers decided to vote 'leave' on the basis of the growing low wage economy within the UK.
It is argued that the lower paid jobs cannot be filled by the indigenous workers, perhaps the low wage on offer acts as a deterrent even though the Government subsidise this low pay from our taxes.
I agree with our PM, the UK needs to be a fairer more inclusive Country for everybody, not
If we could keep the hard working, including the immigrants who want to work, and get rid of the indigenous work shy, who want to live a parasitic life style paid for by those who work, the overall situation would be much better, Particularly for all those prepared to work and contribute into the system, rather than just sucking out of it.
IMO, the immigrant workers live, broadly speaking, to a much lower standard of living than the indigenous workers. You need only have a closer look at certain high immigrant areas to appreciate that thier living by sharing accomadation is normal and acceptable. Therefore this accounts for a very low rent to be paid from thier wage, which is topped up by our taxes.
The immigrant workers also receive child allowance which they send back 'home' along with a proportion of the wages they earn. 'This gives 'them' a head start on the indigenous worker who is lumbered with the same low wage and child allowance but crucially a high cost of housing.
Coming from a East European Country the UK is so appealing and advantageous, certainly far more advantageous than our EU neighbours offer in terms of Social and work opportunity.
The immigrant workers have undercut the living standards by wage pressure upon many trades, as I mentioned previously. Building sites are a case in point wether that be a private house being restored or a large domestic housing estate being developed. The immigrant workers are happy to work for a smaller wage.
The hospitality industry is the same story as is catering.
Incentives for young indigenous workers in these industries are simply unattractive to them, unless the individual is motivated and has the opportunity on a career ladder to improve thier prospects.
IMO the low wage economy created over the past thirty years or so has clearly been of benifit to the UK economy and businesses in general. Why would any business pay a worker £10 when they can pay just £5. However, the Social consequences born from this situation are unsustainable and therefore the disaffected and disenfranchised have voted to leave the EU as a protest.
Don't get me wrong, I believe in hard work but it must be correctly rewarded wether that is in pay, promotions, career structures, apprentice opportunities. Vital elements that have largely been discarded in favour of immigrant labour.
crankedup said:
I take your point and to a certain extent agree with most of your points.
IMO, the immigrant workers live, broadly speaking, to a much lower standard of living than the indigenous workers. You need only have a closer look at certain high immigrant areas to appreciate that thier living by sharing accomadation is normal and acceptable. Therefore this accounts for a very low rent to be paid from thier wage, which is topped up by our taxes.
The immigrant workers also receive child allowance which they send back 'home' along with a proportion of the wages they earn. 'This gives 'them' a head start on the indigenous worker who is lumbered with the same low wage and child allowance but crucially a high cost of housing.
Coming from a East European Country the UK is so appealing and advantageous, certainly far more advantageous than our EU neighbours offer in terms of Social and work opportunity.
The immigrant workers have undercut the living standards by wage pressure upon many trades, as I mentioned previously. Building sites are a case in point wether that be a private house being restored or a large domestic housing estate being developed. The immigrant workers are happy to work for a smaller wage.
The hospitality industry is the same story as is catering.
Incentives for young indigenous workers in these industries are simply unattractive to them, unless the individual is motivated and has the opportunity on a career ladder to improve thier prospects.
IMO the low wage economy created over the past thirty years or so has clearly been of benifit to the UK economy and businesses in general. Why would any business pay a worker £10 when they can pay just £5. However, the Social consequences born from this situation are unsustainable and therefore the disaffected and disenfranchised have voted to leave the EU as a protest.
Don't get me wrong, I believe in hard work but it must be correctly rewarded wether that is in pay, promotions, career structures, apprentice opportunities. Vital elements that have largely been discarded in favour of immigrant labour.
Come on you have missed out on immigrants clogging up hospitals, causing traffic congestion so the GN misses all his appointments, and filling up schools.IMO, the immigrant workers live, broadly speaking, to a much lower standard of living than the indigenous workers. You need only have a closer look at certain high immigrant areas to appreciate that thier living by sharing accomadation is normal and acceptable. Therefore this accounts for a very low rent to be paid from thier wage, which is topped up by our taxes.
The immigrant workers also receive child allowance which they send back 'home' along with a proportion of the wages they earn. 'This gives 'them' a head start on the indigenous worker who is lumbered with the same low wage and child allowance but crucially a high cost of housing.
Coming from a East European Country the UK is so appealing and advantageous, certainly far more advantageous than our EU neighbours offer in terms of Social and work opportunity.
The immigrant workers have undercut the living standards by wage pressure upon many trades, as I mentioned previously. Building sites are a case in point wether that be a private house being restored or a large domestic housing estate being developed. The immigrant workers are happy to work for a smaller wage.
The hospitality industry is the same story as is catering.
Incentives for young indigenous workers in these industries are simply unattractive to them, unless the individual is motivated and has the opportunity on a career ladder to improve thier prospects.
IMO the low wage economy created over the past thirty years or so has clearly been of benifit to the UK economy and businesses in general. Why would any business pay a worker £10 when they can pay just £5. However, the Social consequences born from this situation are unsustainable and therefore the disaffected and disenfranchised have voted to leave the EU as a protest.
Don't get me wrong, I believe in hard work but it must be correctly rewarded wether that is in pay, promotions, career structures, apprentice opportunities. Vital elements that have largely been discarded in favour of immigrant labour.
You can do better.
The highest percentage of yes votes where the elderly. I know it’s terrible all those pensioners wanting to work in Pret or on building sites.
The problem with your argument is only the facts.
UK unemployment at low levels, job vacancies remain at a high level, and real wages rising. What’s not to like.
GetCarter said:
O/P. Just watch what happens in 2019 - 2025. Then you'll see why, even though we all hate the EU, the alternative is much, much worse (especially if you are working class PAYE)
It will be a delight to see you proven wrong, although I can understand your frustration at the loss of all those "free" road infrastructure improvements in the Highlands.Pan Pan Pan said:
oyster said:
SKP555
I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
A good post, but one that perhaps still does not address all the reasons why the majority of voters in the UK voted to leave. and in some cases it does not address the reality of the relationship between the UK and EU.I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
1. `Easy' access to 27+ plus other countries to live and work. It is fine to have easy access to other countries `if' there is work there, but the truth of the matter is that in many EU countries there `is' no work, which is why they have colossal levels of youth unemployment, and hundreds of thousands of EU nationals are trying to get out of the EU, and into the UK every year, despite knowing the UK is leaving the EU.
Regardless of any employment rules the EU lays down, many EU states will still look after their own people first, when times are hard, (as they in many EU states) and get rid of immigrant workers first, A engineer friend worked for Airbus Industrie, and he, and many of his UK colleagues were given the sack, as soon as any issues regarding employment levels arose, despite being better qualified than many of the indigenous workers.
It is only the UK that does not look after its own first.
The influx into the UK also makes it harder for the indigenous population, as they will have to compete with an extra 330 thousand plus people a year from the EU alone, all looking for the same places in schools, and universities, as well as jobs, homes, health care and transport, which we are repeatedly being told that is at breaking point. Many of those coming in who are prepared to work herder for longer for less than the indigenous population. Only 980 thousand UK nationals live, and work in the 3.39 `million' square miles of the EU, but 3 million EU nationals have come to live and work in the 98 `thousand' square miles of the UK. How long do you suppose a country the size of the UK can cope with and absorb, that ratio of people coming in, compared to people leaving the UK?
2. Not a single person in the UK had, or has been given the chance to vote on whether they wanted to be in the EU. They were only given a vote on whether they wanted to be in a European trading bloc known as the EEC, The EEC changed `itself' into a completely different animal in 1993, and for many this was a point of deep contention, which made many angry. The UK citizen has only had two votes regarding the EEC one when they voted in in 1975, and the second in 2016 when they voted out. The (possibly illegal) actions of various UK governments regarding the EU in the interim, does not constitute consent of the people of the UK.
3. The age factor, could indeed be a factor, since given point 2 above, many who were old enough to vote in 1975, feel angry that they were hoodwinked into voting to join the EEC, and on far less information than was available for the 2016 referendum. That it changed `itself' into the undemocratic, money grasping, monster known as the EU that none of them wanted or were allowed to vote on, is possibly why many older people voted leave.
4. The EU is all about money, which is why they want to impose a 60 billion pound fine on the UK for leaving. They don't like the fact that its second largest net contributor of funds is leaving. If you can show me how the UK, despite being the EU`s second largest contributor of funds into the EU has the same level of influence over its course and business as Germany and France, I would be extremely interested, Everyone knows that as far as the EU is concerned it is Germany and France that call all the shots. If the EU were to apportion influence in the EU, in line with what each member state is prepared to pay in, the situation might be fairer for the UK. but this is not what happens in the EU. The UK has lost votes in EU matters, far more than it has ever won. With the UK having a 24 billion trade deficit with the EU in 2016 alone, and for just about every year since the UK joined the EEC, the UK is paying the EU 10.8 billion pounds a year for the privilege of letting the EU sell more of its goods and services into the UK (making their business and factories stronger) that the UK is able to sell into the EU. Just because some UK business are able to make money selling into the EU does not mean that all are, as the UK, steel, aluminium, and cement industries have all declined following EU membership, not to mention the UK fishing industry which has been decimated by EU membership leading to the decline of many UK coastal communities.
5. the UK has always had diverse culture, which has made it what it is today. but where whole communities are swamped with an influx of people (not just from the EU) with very different cultures, in a very short space of time, it naturally made, and makes the indigenous population fearful for their own way of life.
Far too often the rights and culture of local people have been virtually ignored, with many being branded racist, when they dared to express their concerns over this, or at least that is how many of them felt, which is again why many voted leave in the 2016 referendum. None of these points were addressed by those who advocated remain in the run up to the 2106 referendum.
I am disappointed that the UK voted to leave, being a Britain working within the EU, my partner and I get the option to just move country and work here ... We are planning a move to the US next and would have to be married so that my partner could potentially work. Something that only people who wish to work away may be affected by ... but it could also cause a major blocking point for future Britain's wishing to work abroad and those foreign nationals who wish to work in the UK.
This is the only point of contention for me, I do not think it is fair that 70 / 80 / 90 year olds get to decide the future mobility of the youngest generation, will they be able to work abroad, study abroad, perfect their language skills aboard; granted we may come to a similar arrangement as today .... or maybe we wont.
But again, this is a totally selfish view and I voted in the context of what is best for me, not Britain as a whole ... so we leave, lets make the best of it.
oyster said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
oyster said:
SKP555
I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
A good post, but one that perhaps still does not address all the reasons why the majority of voters in the UK voted to leave. and in some cases it does not address the reality of the relationship between the UK and EU.I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
1. `Easy' access to 27+ plus other countries to live and work. It is fine to have easy access to other countries `if' there is work there, but the truth of the matter is that in many EU countries there `is' no work, which is why they have colossal levels of youth unemployment, and hundreds of thousands of EU nationals are trying to get out of the EU, and into the UK every year, despite knowing the UK is leaving the EU.
Regardless of any employment rules the EU lays down, many EU states will still look after their own people first, when times are hard, (as they in many EU states) and get rid of immigrant workers first, A engineer friend worked for Airbus Industrie, and he, and many of his UK colleagues were given the sack, as soon as any issues regarding employment levels arose, despite being better qualified than many of the indigenous workers.
It is only the UK that does not look after its own first.
The influx into the UK also makes it harder for the indigenous population, as they will have to compete with an extra 330 thousand plus people a year from the EU alone, all looking for the same places in schools, and universities, as well as jobs, homes, health care and transport, which we are repeatedly being told that is at breaking point. Many of those coming in who are prepared to work herder for longer for less than the indigenous population. Only 980 thousand UK nationals live, and work in the 3.39 `million' square miles of the EU, but 3 million EU nationals have come to live and work in the 98 `thousand' square miles of the UK. How long do you suppose a country the size of the UK can cope with and absorb, that ratio of people coming in, compared to people leaving the UK?
2. Not a single person in the UK had, or has been given the chance to vote on whether they wanted to be in the EU. They were only given a vote on whether they wanted to be in a European trading bloc known as the EEC, The EEC changed `itself' into a completely different animal in 1993, and for many this was a point of deep contention, which made many angry. The UK citizen has only had two votes regarding the EEC one when they voted in in 1975, and the second in 2016 when they voted out. The (possibly illegal) actions of various UK governments regarding the EU in the interim, does not constitute consent of the people of the UK.
3. The age factor, could indeed be a factor, since given point 2 above, many who were old enough to vote in 1975, feel angry that they were hoodwinked into voting to join the EEC, and on far less information than was available for the 2016 referendum. That it changed `itself' into the undemocratic, money grasping, monster known as the EU that none of them wanted or were allowed to vote on, is possibly why many older people voted leave.
4. The EU is all about money, which is why they want to impose a 60 billion pound fine on the UK for leaving. They don't like the fact that its second largest net contributor of funds is leaving. If you can show me how the UK, despite being the EU`s second largest contributor of funds into the EU has the same level of influence over its course and business as Germany and France, I would be extremely interested, Everyone knows that as far as the EU is concerned it is Germany and France that call all the shots. If the EU were to apportion influence in the EU, in line with what each member state is prepared to pay in, the situation might be fairer for the UK. but this is not what happens in the EU. The UK has lost votes in EU matters, far more than it has ever won. With the UK having a 24 billion trade deficit with the EU in 2016 alone, and for just about every year since the UK joined the EEC, the UK is paying the EU 10.8 billion pounds a year for the privilege of letting the EU sell more of its goods and services into the UK (making their business and factories stronger) that the UK is able to sell into the EU. Just because some UK business are able to make money selling into the EU does not mean that all are, as the UK, steel, aluminium, and cement industries have all declined following EU membership, not to mention the UK fishing industry which has been decimated by EU membership leading to the decline of many UK coastal communities.
5. the UK has always had diverse culture, which has made it what it is today. but where whole communities are swamped with an influx of people (not just from the EU) with very different cultures, in a very short space of time, it naturally made, and makes the indigenous population fearful for their own way of life.
Far too often the rights and culture of local people have been virtually ignored, with many being branded racist, when they dared to express their concerns over this, or at least that is how many of them felt, which is again why many voted leave in the 2016 referendum. None of these points were addressed by those who advocated remain in the run up to the 2106 referendum.
I think that alone goes to show that people aren't at polar extremes of the Brexit divide.
The blue flag waving loonies are in a tiny minority, as are the mouth-frothing foreigner-haters.
As stated in several previous posts on the Brexit issue, I began wanting the UK to remain in the EU for personal reaons, because I am half English, and half Belgian, with great Grandparents coming from Ireland and Germany, respectively. Consequently I have many relatives, and friends on the other side of the channel, and Irish Sea. But, considering myself a UK national, and having looked at the 40+ year relationship between the UK and EEC/EU, I found it harder, and harder to justify the UK remaining in the EU. What some of those who might be described as `frothers' seem to lose sight of so quickly, is that the EU is NOT Europe, and it is not Europe I do not like but the EU which having done some research, I have come to loath.
I had immigration as a reason for voting leave, very low down on my list of reasons for doing so, but not because I dislike foreigners, because I do like many of them, I don't care where a person comes from, what colour skin they have, or what religion they follow, as long as they come her to work, and fit in with UK values.
As mentioned above, many are likely to do more for the UK, than some of the work shy indigenous people, but I do have concerns about even a small proportion of the peoples from a land mass of 3 .39 million square, trying to cram themselves into an island of only 98 thousand square miles, simply because the free movement given under EU membership allows them to do so. It has been said that the entire human population of the world could fit onto the Isle of Wight, and that may be true, but that does not mean the quality of life for the indigenous population, and those from the rest of the world is going to be very nice, or better, at such a high population density.
I am concerned about how long a country the size of the UK which already has a population approaching 70 million, can continue to take in hundreds of thousands of people every year from the EU and the rest of the world, before its very nature is fundamentally changed, (and in a chronological sense) in an extremely short space of time.
In the Northern hemisphere at least, very often those countries with the best standards of living, and the happiest people are those with very low population densities. That is not a luxury the UK can claim to have.
Sylvaforever said:
GetCarter said:
O/P. Just watch what happens in 2019 - 2025. Then you'll see why, even though we all hate the EU, the alternative is much, much worse (especially if you are working class PAYE)
It will be a delight to see you proven wrong, although I can understand your frustration at the loss of all those "free" road infrastructure improvements in the Highlands.Trexthedinosaur said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
oyster said:
SKP555
I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
A good post, but one that perhaps still does not address all the reasons why the majority of voters in the UK voted to leave. and in some cases it does not address the reality of the relationship between the UK and EU.I voted remain but had no love at all for the EU and its institutions. I think the people wearing blue hats were a tiny handful, more for media appearance than anything else.
But in terms of the 'outpouring' of grief following the referendum, I think there are a number of potential reasons for this. (I am sure there are thousands of reasons but these are ones my colleagues/friends/circle mentioned).
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
2. The decision made by many people mostly unaffected by immigration to vote leave. Particularly an issue in the southern home counties where some areas with almost no immigrants still voted in favour of leave.
3. The age factor. I think this one really made people angry - some people resented the idea that swathes of people with only a few years to live were making decisions that would affect younger people for many more years than it would affect them. Not a factor at general elections as there's another one in 5 years, but with the EU referendum this was a decision for life.
4. The business growth argument - most colleagues and business contacts like the ease with which trade with EU partners, clients, suppliers and business units was done. Same rules, no visas, little/no tariffs. And for recruitment - a massively wider talent pool to choose from.
5. The culture argument. One I'm quite sympathetic to. I love the explosion in foreign culture in the UK now. So much choice of restaurants, cafes, art etc. I love roast beef and an ale at the pub, but I like it mixed with some Portuguese cakes and Polish beer.
So to answer your OP - it's not about love for the EU, it was more about what some people feared they might/will lose.
1. `Easy' access to 27+ plus other countries to live and work. It is fine to have easy access to other countries `if' there is work there, but the truth of the matter is that in many EU countries there `is' no work, which is why they have colossal levels of youth unemployment, and hundreds of thousands of EU nationals are trying to get out of the EU, and into the UK every year, despite knowing the UK is leaving the EU.
Regardless of any employment rules the EU lays down, many EU states will still look after their own people first, when times are hard, (as they in many EU states) and get rid of immigrant workers first, A engineer friend worked for Airbus Industrie, and he, and many of his UK colleagues were given the sack, as soon as any issues regarding employment levels arose, despite being better qualified than many of the indigenous workers.
It is only the UK that does not look after its own first.
The influx into the UK also makes it harder for the indigenous population, as they will have to compete with an extra 330 thousand plus people a year from the EU alone, all looking for the same places in schools, and universities, as well as jobs, homes, health care and transport, which we are repeatedly being told that is at breaking point. Many of those coming in who are prepared to work herder for longer for less than the indigenous population. Only 980 thousand UK nationals live, and work in the 3.39 `million' square miles of the EU, but 3 million EU nationals have come to live and work in the 98 `thousand' square miles of the UK. How long do you suppose a country the size of the UK can cope with and absorb, that ratio of people coming in, compared to people leaving the UK?
2. Not a single person in the UK had, or has been given the chance to vote on whether they wanted to be in the EU. They were only given a vote on whether they wanted to be in a European trading bloc known as the EEC, The EEC changed `itself' into a completely different animal in 1993, and for many this was a point of deep contention, which made many angry. The UK citizen has only had two votes regarding the EEC one when they voted in in 1975, and the second in 2016 when they voted out. The (possibly illegal) actions of various UK governments regarding the EU in the interim, does not constitute consent of the people of the UK.
3. The age factor, could indeed be a factor, since given point 2 above, many who were old enough to vote in 1975, feel angry that they were hoodwinked into voting to join the EEC, and on far less information than was available for the 2016 referendum. That it changed `itself' into the undemocratic, money grasping, monster known as the EU that none of them wanted or were allowed to vote on, is possibly why many older people voted leave.
4. The EU is all about money, which is why they want to impose a 60 billion pound fine on the UK for leaving. They don't like the fact that its second largest net contributor of funds is leaving. If you can show me how the UK, despite being the EU`s second largest contributor of funds into the EU has the same level of influence over its course and business as Germany and France, I would be extremely interested, Everyone knows that as far as the EU is concerned it is Germany and France that call all the shots. If the EU were to apportion influence in the EU, in line with what each member state is prepared to pay in, the situation might be fairer for the UK. but this is not what happens in the EU. The UK has lost votes in EU matters, far more than it has ever won. With the UK having a 24 billion trade deficit with the EU in 2016 alone, and for just about every year since the UK joined the EEC, the UK is paying the EU 10.8 billion pounds a year for the privilege of letting the EU sell more of its goods and services into the UK (making their business and factories stronger) that the UK is able to sell into the EU. Just because some UK business are able to make money selling into the EU does not mean that all are, as the UK, steel, aluminium, and cement industries have all declined following EU membership, not to mention the UK fishing industry which has been decimated by EU membership leading to the decline of many UK coastal communities.
5. the UK has always had diverse culture, which has made it what it is today. but where whole communities are swamped with an influx of people (not just from the EU) with very different cultures, in a very short space of time, it naturally made, and makes the indigenous population fearful for their own way of life.
Far too often the rights and culture of local people have been virtually ignored, with many being branded racist, when they dared to express their concerns over this, or at least that is how many of them felt, which is again why many voted leave in the 2016 referendum. None of these points were addressed by those who advocated remain in the run up to the 2106 referendum.
I am disappointed that the UK voted to leave, being a Britain working within the EU, my partner and I get the option to just move country and work here ... We are planning a move to the US next and would have to be married so that my partner could potentially work. Something that only people who wish to work away may be affected by ... but it could also cause a major blocking point for future Britain's wishing to work abroad and those foreign nationals who wish to work in the UK.
This is the only point of contention for me, I do not think it is fair that 70 / 80 / 90 year olds get to decide the future mobility of the youngest generation, will they be able to work abroad, study abroad, perfect their language skills aboard; granted we may come to a similar arrangement as today .... or maybe we wont.
But again, this is a totally selfish view and I voted in the context of what is best for me, not Britain as a whole ... so we leave, lets make the best of it.
Whilst I can understand you comment regarding 70/80/90 year olds deciding the future mobility of the youngest generation, I would have to say that like it or not, that is the way the world works.
I don't think it was fair that hundreds of thousands of much better people than me ( who would now be in their 70/80/90`s), died fighting in WW1 and WW2 to give me, and the people of the UK the freedoms we in this country all enjoy now, but that is what happened.
I would think that many of them would be upset that the country they fought against in those conflicts, is now the most powerful one (in an alledged organization of equals) in terms of its influence over the EU , and thereby its influence over Europe.
But what is done is done, and like you say, the best thing everyone can do now is try to make the best we all can of it. The ones who seem to be trying even now to thwart that, are the ones I am suspicious of.
Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Thursday 23 March 13:52
Mrr T said:
crankedup said:
I take your point and to a certain extent agree with most of your points.
IMO, the immigrant workers live, broadly speaking, to a much lower standard of living than the indigenous workers. You need only have a closer look at certain high immigrant areas to appreciate that thier living by sharing accomadation is normal and acceptable. Therefore this accounts for a very low rent to be paid from thier wage, which is topped up by our taxes.
The immigrant workers also receive child allowance which they send back 'home' along with a proportion of the wages they earn. 'This gives 'them' a head start on the indigenous worker who is lumbered with the same low wage and child allowance but crucially a high cost of housing.
Coming from a East European Country the UK is so appealing and advantageous, certainly far more advantageous than our EU neighbours offer in terms of Social and work opportunity.
The immigrant workers have undercut the living standards by wage pressure upon many trades, as I mentioned previously. Building sites are a case in point wether that be a private house being restored or a large domestic housing estate being developed. The immigrant workers are happy to work for a smaller wage.
The hospitality industry is the same story as is catering.
Incentives for young indigenous workers in these industries are simply unattractive to them, unless the individual is motivated and has the opportunity on a career ladder to improve thier prospects.
IMO the low wage economy created over the past thirty years or so has clearly been of benifit to the UK economy and businesses in general. Why would any business pay a worker £10 when they can pay just £5. However, the Social consequences born from this situation are unsustainable and therefore the disaffected and disenfranchised have voted to leave the EU as a protest.
Don't get me wrong, I believe in hard work but it must be correctly rewarded wether that is in pay, promotions, career structures, apprentice opportunities. Vital elements that have largely been discarded in favour of immigrant labour.
Come on you have missed out on immigrants clogging up hospitals, causing traffic congestion so the GN misses all his appointments, and filling up schools.IMO, the immigrant workers live, broadly speaking, to a much lower standard of living than the indigenous workers. You need only have a closer look at certain high immigrant areas to appreciate that thier living by sharing accomadation is normal and acceptable. Therefore this accounts for a very low rent to be paid from thier wage, which is topped up by our taxes.
The immigrant workers also receive child allowance which they send back 'home' along with a proportion of the wages they earn. 'This gives 'them' a head start on the indigenous worker who is lumbered with the same low wage and child allowance but crucially a high cost of housing.
Coming from a East European Country the UK is so appealing and advantageous, certainly far more advantageous than our EU neighbours offer in terms of Social and work opportunity.
The immigrant workers have undercut the living standards by wage pressure upon many trades, as I mentioned previously. Building sites are a case in point wether that be a private house being restored or a large domestic housing estate being developed. The immigrant workers are happy to work for a smaller wage.
The hospitality industry is the same story as is catering.
Incentives for young indigenous workers in these industries are simply unattractive to them, unless the individual is motivated and has the opportunity on a career ladder to improve thier prospects.
IMO the low wage economy created over the past thirty years or so has clearly been of benifit to the UK economy and businesses in general. Why would any business pay a worker £10 when they can pay just £5. However, the Social consequences born from this situation are unsustainable and therefore the disaffected and disenfranchised have voted to leave the EU as a protest.
Don't get me wrong, I believe in hard work but it must be correctly rewarded wether that is in pay, promotions, career structures, apprentice opportunities. Vital elements that have largely been discarded in favour of immigrant labour.
You can do better.
The highest percentage of yes votes where the elderly. I know it’s terrible all those pensioners wanting to work in Pret or on building sites.
The problem with your argument is only the facts.
UK unemployment at low levels, job vacancies remain at a high level, and real wages rising. What’s not to like.
Elderly people do wor in the low wage economy, for example supermarkets. Less so buildings sites, hospitality, catering! manufacturing.
Unemployment is low but unless the job vacancies are identified the relevance to the low wage economy cannot be established.
Wages are no longer rising in real terms, add to that fact that those wages that have risen are the first wage rises for many in almost a decade.
Those that have. hoses to ignore the genuine real world situation of immigration numbers are either isolated from the circumstances or choose to pretend the problems do not exist.
Can you address each of the problem areas that I mention in this and my previous post?
oyster said:
SKP555
1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
I really struggle with this. It is somewhere between vindictive scare-mongering or pure stupidity from people who don't bother to research things for themselves. 1. The loss of easy access to live and work in 27+ other countries, especially for future children. I think some people were more outraged that this effect was decided by many who didn't want such facilities for themselves, but were happy to deny it for others.
'Easy' access, even in the current situation of EU passport holder looking to work in alternate EU country, still has stipulations depending on the country in question. Registration with police, applying to the local townhall to stay longer than 90 days, ensuring you can actually obtain employment, applying for a residence card, demonstrating that you can support yourself, etc.
This will not and cannot change dramatically as the EU and UK job markets are intrinsically linked and co-dependent. At worst, some further administration will apply but nothing like what the UK imposes on non-EU professionals who add value to this economy. In the real world, you need to qualify to work in a different country, you actually have to be in demand and you have to demonstrate you are capable and that you can support yourself.
Nobody, nobody (!) has seriously suggested mass deportations or banning UK workers from EU countries.
turbobloke said:
4x4Tyke said:
gruffalo said:
The same can be said for the leave argument, Econmics, human rights , etc!
It depends on your perspective.
No it cannot, the economy has suffered and will suffer more, we will all lose rights and security will be diminished to boot. All over an irrational hatred of foreigners.It depends on your perspective.
Early Doors One Month After Brexit VOTE (DT)
Unemployment is down, prices are steady, shoppers are confident and the government ran a budget surplus in July. The first economic data for July – the month following the Brexit referendum – was published this week, and shows no signs of an immediate economic collapse. It is early days and a slowdown is still expected, but the data are reassuring so far.
Slowdown, ho ho ho.
Longer-Term Position is Much Better with Boom not Bust e.g. Six Months Later (DE)
FTSE 100 hits new record high in Britain's Brexit economy boom as the positive economic news continues to flow following the Brexit vote.
The Future of the UK Economy Is Looking Bright(TS)
UK set for Brexit boom in 2017 as top business bosses have shown a boost in confidence in the UK economy.
Security scaremongering was quickly debunked by experienced security professionals and we saw headlines after the security porkies such as "Ex head of MI6 argues Brexit would not harm security" also "Brexit won't harm UK security, says US former spy chief" and perhaps best of all "Brexit will NOT damage UK security, admits EU". Just like the 3 million unemployed, the instant and year-long recession, the multi-£billion emergency budget and the sky falling in, it's baseless scaremongering.
As to future rights, as that crystal ball is performing so well what are the numbers for tomorrow's Euromillions? We can keep it between ourselves, nobody will notice.
March 29th, a good day in the offing and the Leaving, including for the UK economy.
Brexit hasn't happened yet. All we have had so far is the vote.
Trying to assess the full impact at this point in time would be like - deciding to go out to a restaurant for a meal and then saying how full up you are, long before you even leave your house, or look at the menu to see what they serve.
Summary: Too soon to say.
Mandalore said:
turbobloke said:
4x4Tyke said:
gruffalo said:
The same can be said for the leave argument, Econmics, human rights , etc!
It depends on your perspective.
No it cannot, the economy has suffered and will suffer more, we will all lose rights and security will be diminished to boot. All over an irrational hatred of foreigners.It depends on your perspective.
Early Doors One Month After Brexit VOTE (DT)
Unemployment is down, prices are steady, shoppers are confident and the government ran a budget surplus in July. The first economic data for July – the month following the Brexit referendum – was published this week, and shows no signs of an immediate economic collapse. It is early days and a slowdown is still expected, but the data are reassuring so far.
Slowdown, ho ho ho.
Longer-Term Position is Much Better with Boom not Bust e.g. Six Months Later (DE)
FTSE 100 hits new record high in Britain's Brexit economy boom as the positive economic news continues to flow following the Brexit vote.
The Future of the UK Economy Is Looking Bright(TS)
UK set for Brexit boom in 2017 as top business bosses have shown a boost in confidence in the UK economy.
Security scaremongering was quickly debunked by experienced security professionals and we saw headlines after the security porkies such as "Ex head of MI6 argues Brexit would not harm security" also "Brexit won't harm UK security, says US former spy chief" and perhaps best of all "Brexit will NOT damage UK security, admits EU". Just like the 3 million unemployed, the instant and year-long recession, the multi-£billion emergency budget and the sky falling in, it's baseless scaremongering.
As to future rights, as that crystal ball is performing so well what are the numbers for tomorrow's Euromillions? We can keep it between ourselves, nobody will notice.
March 29th, a good day in the offing and the Leaving, including for the UK economy.
Brexit hasn't happened yet. All we have had so far is the vote.
Trying to assess the full impact at this point in time would be like - deciding to go out to a restaurant for a meal and then saying how full up you are, long before you even leave your house, or look at the menu to see what they serve.
Summary: Too soon to say.
It's only too soon to say how much better things will be than the already improved situation we now see.
Edited by turbobloke on Thursday 23 March 16:27
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff