How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 6)
Discussion
pgh said:
I too have qualifications in economics, where one of the first things you learn is that there is no such thing as a perfect market...
That is nothing to do with the topic in hand though - why is a free market "nasty"?
I do not have any qualifications in economics, nor do I think a free market is nasty.That is nothing to do with the topic in hand though - why is a free market "nasty"?
I was merely stating that the 'Free Market' is anything but, on which I hope we can agree.
powerstroke said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Coolbanana said:
No, many Leavers have expressed wanting to leave the EU based upon a belief, incorrect in my view, that the EU is holding the UK back, retarding the ability to trade more effectively.
So the customs union and associated tariffs are a figment of our imagination?brexit last night , they live and work in France and are just about to retire, the nub of it was 100% selfish
wanting the benefits of swanning about not putting anyting back into the UK or caring about the people of the UK
just being free to come back to sponge on the NHS when they are old and decrepit ..
interesting you are turning on your own family too. nothing like brexit to bring the country together eh?
Nickgnome said:
otis criblecoblis said:
You answered the ability to remove people was your answer to controlling numbers. You of course declined to say how that would really control, or get near to the current governments target, mainly because you know it is useless at doing so.
You want to pretend this is a control to be used, but just isn't isn't in use. Everyone else knows you are pissing down their back while saying it's raining.
Lets see if you want to dodge the question again. How would any of the things you cite control numbers and meet a target of 50K ?
How can I make it any clearer? You want to pretend this is a control to be used, but just isn't isn't in use. Everyone else knows you are pissing down their back while saying it's raining.
Lets see if you want to dodge the question again. How would any of the things you cite control numbers and meet a target of 50K ?
I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH F.o.M
Why should I need to come up with a solution to an issue that for me does not exist? Surely that's your problem as it seems you have an issue with immigration?
I merely pointed you to the relevant clauses that enable the government to ensure Eu citizens do not stay without a job. If you feel the need for legal advise on how the clauses work speak to a lawyer.
If you do not think the Clauses are inadequate then it is for you to advise that why, in your opinion, they fail.
Edited by Nickgnome on Monday 17th December 11:36
Edited by Nickgnome on Monday 17th December 11:36
I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
Nickgnome said:
otis criblecoblis said:
You answered the ability to remove people was your answer to controlling numbers. You of course declined to say how that would really control, or get near to the current governments target, mainly because you know it is useless at doing so.
You want to pretend this is a control to be used, but just isn't isn't in use. Everyone else knows you are pissing down their back while saying it's raining.
Lets see if you want to dodge the question again. How would any of the things you cite control numbers and meet a target of 50K ?
How can I make it any clearer? You want to pretend this is a control to be used, but just isn't isn't in use. Everyone else knows you are pissing down their back while saying it's raining.
Lets see if you want to dodge the question again. How would any of the things you cite control numbers and meet a target of 50K ?
I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH F.o.M
Why should I need to come up with a solution to an issue that for me does not exist? Surely that's your problem as it seems you have an issue with immigration?
I merely pointed you to the relevant clauses that enable the government to ensure Eu citizens do not stay without a job. If you feel the need for legal advise on how the clauses work speak to a lawyer.
If you do not think the Clauses are adequate then it is for you to advise the why, in your opinion, they fail.
Now you are rather stupidly making out, that your love of FOM means you don't have to answer any details on how the clauses you cite work. You weren't asked for a solution, you were asked how the rules you cite may work to meet current government targets. You can't or won't answer.
Lets keep your avoidance to a minimum, and say your new found love to kick people out after 3 months with no job is a costly and almost unenforceable non answer as to why EU immigration can be controlled.
Do you not ever stop and think your exact kinda of obfuscation is what the public got bored of during the referendum , particularly on the immigration debate ?
Chicken Chaser said:
Thought i'd post a couple of articles i've just read through. Puts perspective on both sides of the argument although one is certainly more focused than the other.
https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speec...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/brexit-wou...
That first link essentially /thread as it puts to bed all of the Leaver Brexit Bingo so readily trotted out. But experts eh? https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speec...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/brexit-wou...
If you can't be bothered to read all of it, just try the Third Lesson.
otis criblecoblis said:
You are hard work. You were backing the clauses as a control. You are perfectly free to love FOM, but you intervened when I asked Helicopter ( still rather amusingly avoiding answering ) how these were in any way able to control numbers effectively, and were then asked how they could be used to meet the governments target.
Now you are rather stupidly making out, that your love of FOM means you don't have to answer any details on how the clauses you cite work. You weren't asked for a solution, you were asked how the rules you cite may work to meet current government targets. You can't or won't answer.
Lets keep your avoidance to a minimum, and say your new found love to kick people out after 3 months with no job is a costly and almost unenforceable non answer as to why EU immigration can be controlled.
Do you not ever stop and think your exact kinda of obfuscation is what the public got bored of during the referendum , particularly on the immigration debate ?
Can you quote me correctly, please. Now you are rather stupidly making out, that your love of FOM means you don't have to answer any details on how the clauses you cite work. You weren't asked for a solution, you were asked how the rules you cite may work to meet current government targets. You can't or won't answer.
Lets keep your avoidance to a minimum, and say your new found love to kick people out after 3 months with no job is a costly and almost unenforceable non answer as to why EU immigration can be controlled.
Do you not ever stop and think your exact kinda of obfuscation is what the public got bored of during the referendum , particularly on the immigration debate ?
I said 'No issue' not Love
I 'stated Clauses' Not 'Backing Clauses'
I made no comment on their effectiveness or whether they have been applied in part or at all.
For the avoidance of doubt. I WILL NOT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. As I said if you do not understand those clauses go take some advice.
I hope you are not involved in Contracts.
Helicopter123 said:
Nickgnome said:
otis criblecoblis said:
You answered the ability to remove people was your answer to controlling numbers. You of course declined to say how that would really control, or get near to the current governments target, mainly because you know it is useless at doing so.
You want to pretend this is a control to be used, but just isn't isn't in use. Everyone else knows you are pissing down their back while saying it's raining.
Lets see if you want to dodge the question again. How would any of the things you cite control numbers and meet a target of 50K ?
How can I make it any clearer? You want to pretend this is a control to be used, but just isn't isn't in use. Everyone else knows you are pissing down their back while saying it's raining.
Lets see if you want to dodge the question again. How would any of the things you cite control numbers and meet a target of 50K ?
I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH F.o.M
Why should I need to come up with a solution to an issue that for me does not exist? Surely that's your problem as it seems you have an issue with immigration?
I merely pointed you to the relevant clauses that enable the government to ensure Eu citizens do not stay without a job. If you feel the need for legal advise on how the clauses work speak to a lawyer.
If you do not think the Clauses are inadequate then it is for you to advise that why, in your opinion, they fail.
Edited by Nickgnome on Monday 17th December 11:36
Edited by Nickgnome on Monday 17th December 11:36
I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
kurt535 said:
He will be better off staying there rather than come back to the disaster zone that the NHS is turning into due to brexit.
interesting you are turning on your own family too. nothing like brexit to bring the country together eh?
So the problems in the NHS are down to Brexit.........interesting you are turning on your own family too. nothing like brexit to bring the country together eh?
Really ??
.
Helicopter123 said:
Good post.
I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
Talking of replies, what part of the EU did you work or study in?I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
Apologys if I missed your response to the same question I asked yesterday.
Nickgnome said:
otis criblecoblis said:
You are hard work. You were backing the clauses as a control. You are perfectly free to love FOM, but you intervened when I asked Helicopter ( still rather amusingly avoiding answering ) how these were in any way able to control numbers effectively, and were then asked how they could be used to meet the governments target.
Now you are rather stupidly making out, that your love of FOM means you don't have to answer any details on how the clauses you cite work. You weren't asked for a solution, you were asked how the rules you cite may work to meet current government targets. You can't or won't answer.
Lets keep your avoidance to a minimum, and say your new found love to kick people out after 3 months with no job is a costly and almost unenforceable non answer as to why EU immigration can be controlled.
Do you not ever stop and think your exact kinda of obfuscation is what the public got bored of during the referendum , particularly on the immigration debate ?
Can you quote me correctly, please. Now you are rather stupidly making out, that your love of FOM means you don't have to answer any details on how the clauses you cite work. You weren't asked for a solution, you were asked how the rules you cite may work to meet current government targets. You can't or won't answer.
Lets keep your avoidance to a minimum, and say your new found love to kick people out after 3 months with no job is a costly and almost unenforceable non answer as to why EU immigration can be controlled.
Do you not ever stop and think your exact kinda of obfuscation is what the public got bored of during the referendum , particularly on the immigration debate ?
I said 'No issue' not Love
I 'stated Clauses' Not 'Backing Clauses'
I made no comment on their effectiveness or whether they have been applied in part or at all.
For the avoidance of doubt. I WILL NOT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. As I said if you do not understand those clauses go take some advice.
I hope you are not involved in Contracts.
Why are you afraid to answer question of the effectiveness of things your cite ?
gooner1 said:
Helicopter123 said:
Good post.
I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
Talking of replies, what part of the EU did you work or study in?I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
Apologys if I missed your response to the same question I asked yesterday.
I've studied in Scotland.
Why do you want to know?
Robertj21a said:
kurt535 said:
He will be better off staying there rather than come back to the disaster zone that the NHS is turning into due to brexit.
interesting you are turning on your own family too. nothing like brexit to bring the country together eh?
So the problems in the NHS are down to Brexit.........interesting you are turning on your own family too. nothing like brexit to bring the country together eh?
Really ??
.
from our local NHS in the last 18 months , I can categorically state that Kurt's theory
in no way matches my experience. Just so you know.
otis criblecoblis said:
Nickgnome said:
otis criblecoblis said:
You are hard work. You were backing the clauses as a control. You are perfectly free to love FOM, but you intervened when I asked Helicopter ( still rather amusingly avoiding answering ) how these were in any way able to control numbers effectively, and were then asked how they could be used to meet the governments target.
Now you are rather stupidly making out, that your love of FOM means you don't have to answer any details on how the clauses you cite work. You weren't asked for a solution, you were asked how the rules you cite may work to meet current government targets. You can't or won't answer.
Lets keep your avoidance to a minimum, and say your new found love to kick people out after 3 months with no job is a costly and almost unenforceable non answer as to why EU immigration can be controlled.
Do you not ever stop and think your exact kinda of obfuscation is what the public got bored of during the referendum , particularly on the immigration debate ?
Can you quote me correctly, please. Now you are rather stupidly making out, that your love of FOM means you don't have to answer any details on how the clauses you cite work. You weren't asked for a solution, you were asked how the rules you cite may work to meet current government targets. You can't or won't answer.
Lets keep your avoidance to a minimum, and say your new found love to kick people out after 3 months with no job is a costly and almost unenforceable non answer as to why EU immigration can be controlled.
Do you not ever stop and think your exact kinda of obfuscation is what the public got bored of during the referendum , particularly on the immigration debate ?
I said 'No issue' not Love
I 'stated Clauses' Not 'Backing Clauses'
I made no comment on their effectiveness or whether they have been applied in part or at all.
For the avoidance of doubt. I WILL NOT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. As I said if you do not understand those clauses go take some advice.
I hope you are not involved in Contracts.
Why are you afraid to answer question of the effectiveness of things your cite ?
Where does your 50k figure come from?
Helicopter123 said:
Good post.
I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
There is no 50k limit. The number is half the current target and used as a hypothetical. You were asked how the controls you cite for the EU might meet that number, or really any number. You avoided answering, just like Nick. I look forward to the reply.
Where does this target of 50k net immigration come from? Looks very very low for an economy such as ours...
ben5575 said:
Chicken Chaser said:
Thought i'd post a couple of articles i've just read through. Puts perspective on both sides of the argument although one is certainly more focused than the other.
https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speec...
That first link essentially /thread as it puts to bed all of the Leaver Brexit Bingo so readily trotted out. But experts eh? https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speec...
If you can't be bothered to read all of it, just try the Third Lesson.
ben5575 said:
Chicken Chaser said:
All sweetness & joy in the EU is it ?
otis criblecoblis said:
There is no 50k limit. The number is half the current target and used as a hypothetical. You were asked how the controls your cite for the EU might meet that number, or really any number. You avoided answering, just like Nick.
So why are you bringing up 50k?Is this your personal preference?
Is that for EU or non-EU immigration? Is it net or gross? Over what time frame? Skilled or unskilled?
You seem to want to ask questions but never answer, why is that?
Helicopter123 said:
otis criblecoblis said:
There is no 50k limit. The number is half the current target and used as a hypothetical. You were asked how the controls your cite for the EU might meet that number, or really any number. You avoided answering, just like Nick.
So why are you bringing up 50k?Is this your personal preference?
Is that for EU or non-EU immigration? Is it net or gross? Over what time frame? Skilled or unskilled?
You seem to want to ask questions but never answer, why is that?
1, The current immigration target of the government is 100k net a year
2, As a hypothetical situation in how the rules you cite may work in controlling EU immigration, half that figure has been taken to be used as an example as a simple split from RoW and EU.
3, 50k has never been given my myself as a number for all immigration.
4, You've been asked how the controls you cite may work in achieving this number, and failed.
ben5575 said:
Chicken Chaser said:
Thought i'd post a couple of articles i've just read through. Puts perspective on both sides of the argument although one is certainly more focused than the other.
https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speec...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/brexit-wou...
That first link essentially /thread as it puts to bed all of the Leaver Brexit Bingo so readily trotted out. But experts eh? https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/12/13/full-speec...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/brexit-wou...
.
As he himself admits he is not an economist but what he has gone through very well is both the negotiating stance of the EU and the legal position.
It is probably the most informative article I have read on Brexit recently and shows why a half in, half out, relationship is not going to work, particularly from the position May has put us.
The sixth lesson is the most important in understanding that.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff