Theresa May

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

PurpleMoonlight

22,362 posts

156 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
May even got the Queen to say "get the best possible deal".

fk off you silly cow you have no credibility left.

p1stonhead

25,489 posts

166 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
The best deal would be limiting immigration through our own controls (say immigrants need to be working after 3 months or else we can send them home), free single market access and not being part of schengen.

Wait a second.......

Jinx

11,345 posts

259 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
p1stonhead said:
The best deal would be limiting immigration through our own controls (say immigrants need to be working after 3 months or else we can send them home)
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.

Eddie Strohacker

3,879 posts

85 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....

It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?

Jinx

11,345 posts

259 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....

It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
That was the point - if you send them home they can under the existing rules of freedom of movement, turn around and come back.

Mario149

7,750 posts

177 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Jinx said:
p1stonhead said:
The best deal would be limiting immigration through our own controls (say immigrants need to be working after 3 months or else we can send them home)
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
I think the point is no-one even bothered to try because the market sorts itself out. As I've said elsewhere, I guarantee that if we implement some sort of border controls while at the same time issuing visas for all the businesses that ask for them in order to ensure our economy functions correctly, we'll end up with as near as makes no practical difference the same levels of immigration, just with the extra cost, complexity and lag of managing the new system.

Murph7355

37,648 posts

255 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Mario149 said:
I think the point is no-one even bothered to try because the market sorts itself out. As I've said elsewhere, I guarantee that if we implement some sort of border controls while at the same time issuing visas for all the businesses that ask for them in order to ensure our economy functions correctly, we'll end up with as near as makes no practical difference the same levels of immigration, just with the extra cost, complexity and lag of managing the new system.
That assumes that all businesses who ask will get (in the long run).

If some businesses don't get, they'll need to find their resources elsewhere (or fold).

Remember nobody is talking about restricting the high value resources.

Randy Winkman

16,014 posts

188 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Jinx said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....

It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
That was the point - if you send them home they can under the existing rules of freedom of movement, turn around and come back.
Have one of those "No return within 1 hour" signs.

Jinx

11,345 posts

259 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Mario149 said:
I think the point is no-one even bothered to try because the market sorts itself out. As I've said elsewhere, I guarantee that if we implement some sort of border controls while at the same time issuing visas for all the businesses that ask for them in order to ensure our economy functions correctly, we'll end up with as near as makes no practical difference the same levels of immigration, just with the extra cost, complexity and lag of managing the new system.
That's the false premise bit. Under the current system (non-EU) there are some pretty tight rules under the granting of work visa's (I don't think coffee maker at Costa is included). So the argument "it will all be the same anyway so let's not change anything" is based on a false premise.

Eddie Strohacker

3,879 posts

85 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Jinx said:
That was the point - if you send them home they can under the existing rules of freedom of movement, turn around and come back.
Not really. If the state invested in entry & exit checks & an effective ID scheme, it would be able under the rules, to weed out those who failed to meet the criteria I.e gaining employment within three months, returning on spec. It chooses not to because it has no incentive to do so outside of political sentiment. Dodgy businesses circumventing the rules for their own purposes is a separate matter.

Jinx

11,345 posts

259 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Eddie Strohacker said:
Not really. If the state invested in entry & exit checks & an effective ID scheme, it would be able under the rules, to weed out those who failed to meet the criteria I.e gaining employment within three months, returning on spec. It chooses not to because it has no incentive to do so outside of political sentiment. Dodgy businesses circumventing the rules for their own purposes is a separate matter.
So invest in a hugely costly process that would probably go against data protection rules (you would need and entire database of EU nationals) just to kick someone out for 24 hours. And you wonder why they didn't implement this.

Eddie Strohacker

3,879 posts

85 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Jinx said:
So invest in a hugely costly process that would probably go against data protection rules (you would need and entire database of EU nationals) just to kick someone out for 24 hours. And you wonder why they didn't implement this.
Is the answer not obvious? Migrants as a whole pay more in than they take out. Successive governments have had no incentive to invest in a system to weed out the comparatively small number who game the system but whom also receive disproportionate coverage in the gutter press.


crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....

It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
Human Rights.

crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So invest in a hugely costly process that would probably go against data protection rules (you would need and entire database of EU nationals) just to kick someone out for 24 hours. And you wonder why they didn't implement this.
Is the answer not obvious? Migrants as a whole pay more in than they take out. Successive governments have had no incentive to invest in a system to weed out the comparatively small number who game the system but whom also receive disproportionate coverage in the gutter press.

Falls back onto the same old same old, having lost the argument with sensible discussion! It's not simply a matter of immmigrant workers issues that the UK decided to leave the EU is it.

Eddie Strohacker

3,879 posts

85 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
crankedup said:
Falls back onto the same old same old, having lost the argument with sensible discussion! It's not simply a matter of immmigrant workers issues that the UK decided to leave the EU is it.
No but it is the matter under discussion. No idea why you would try to take a diversionary position by lobbing in a drive by two word 'Human rights' bomb, unless of course you realise belatedly that some of us aren't just making this up as we go along.

Deptford Draylons

10,480 posts

242 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
p1stonhead said:
The best deal would be limiting immigration through our own controls (say immigrants need to be working after 3 months or else we can send them home), free single market access and not being part of schengen.

Wait a second.......
If those controls had worked, you may have tipped the balance of the vote. People knew they didn't work, never would and got bored of the gullible telling them controls were in place.

Jockman

17,912 posts

159 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
pgh said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
Migrants as a whole pay more in than they take out.
Whilst it would be truly fantastic if this was the case, I have to view this claim with a skeptical eye. Do you have any data/research behind this claim please?

Using the information here: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=15... an individual needs to be earning a very healthy salary in order to be considered a net contributor. I can't imagine that migrants as a whole average £40k+ salaries, it seems this would need to be the case for your claim to stand up.

Very happy to look at any data you have - it would be truly awesome if all of the people coming here were indeed contributing.
A reminder of the dara would be useful.

To be fair to Eddie, that's not what he is saying.

Eddie Strohacker

3,879 posts

85 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
pgh said:
Whilst it would be truly fantastic if this was the case, I have to view this claim with a skeptical eye. Do you have any data/research behind this claim please?

Using the information here: https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=15... an individual needs to be earning a very healthy salary in order to be considered a net contributor. I can't imagine that migrants as a whole average £40k+ salaries, it seems this would need to be the case for your claim to stand up.

Very happy to look at any data you have - it would be truly awesome if all of the people coming here were indeed contributing.
As ever, there is debate & some assumption around the subject & research into it when delaing with large numbers but overall, I think I can make the claim without Sheriff Rosco P Coltrane running me out of town.

https://fullfact.org/immigration/do-eu-immigrants-...

p1stonhead

25,489 posts

166 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....

It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
Quite. Lots of people don't know we can currently deport people after 3 months. We just don't. Perhaps we should ask the PM/ former Home Secretary why!

Deptford Draylons

10,480 posts

242 months

Thursday 22nd June 2017
quotequote all
p1stonhead said:
Eddie Strohacker said:
Jinx said:
So how does that work then? And with free movement how do you stop them turning around the next day and coming back? It's one of those pointless nods to sovereignty that the EU makes when in practice the EU remains supreme.
Ummm....

It's the existing freedom of movement rules. The point being made is the UK Government chooses not to enforce them. The question you should be asking is why not?
Quite. Lots of people don't know we can currently deport people after 3 months. We just don't. Perhaps we should ask the PM/ former Home Secretary why!
Because it doesn't work, near impossible to enforce and probably because rounding up foreigners and deporting them for not having a job after 3 months would send you and others on PH in a Nazi tourettes outrage that even Ken Livingstone would find embarrassing.
You advocate a scheme you know not to work and tell people systems are in place. Sorry, people aren't buying that bullst any longer.
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED