** The Brexit Thread ** - 'Brexit Means Brexit'

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by bovlomov »

By leaving the EU we are abandoning the racist immigration policy that favours white Europeans above the rest of the world. We can now have an immigration policy that treats all equally. (Have I got that right, blackbike?)

But
Britain will have to relax immigration rules for Australians if it wants to strike a free trade deal with the Commonwealth nation, its high commissioner to London has said.


If the UK strikes a load of new deals that favour the mostly rich, mostly white anglophones of the world, will that be an improvement on the current policy?
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by Psamathe »

pwa wrote:
Psamathe wrote:
kwackers wrote:Two in a row is my preferred system. If people want the same the second time round and haven't been convinced then that's fair enough.
(Which obviously means if the next one was 'remain' then there'd need to be at least one more after that)

I suspect that the longer this goes on the more people will appreciate that all those "scare mongers" from "Project Fear" were actually right - just wrong about the timing. So far, several major banks are moving significant staff numbers out of the City and to the EU (big revenue losses for UK Treasury), our currency has completely collapsed, inflation is rising fast, we've had to cut interest rates below the emergency levels needed thanks to the banking crisis, we've had to launch into another round of QE, NHS is not getting the funding needed/promised, taxation is increasing, etc. And Brexit has not even started! Of course none of that will really impact the millionaires sitting in Westminster pursuing their ideologies (to be paid for by the rest of us).

We now have the opportunity to reflect having experience of the actual impacts. We can see what is happening and can make the choice based on actual experience/knowledge of some of the impacts.

Except, this time we need proper questions, not something vague that has allowed one politician to pursue her own chosen extreme interpretation of what was not even asked.

Ian


To be honest, Ian, I think you are scratching around for negative effects of Brexit so far. Inflation is up a tiny bit, largely for other reasons but partly due to the fall in the pound. The Base Rate was lowered from almost nothing to a tiny bitter closer to nothing. The NHS is getting about the same as it would have got anyway. Underfunding of the NHS and social care is a long term issue that we need to face up to, regardless of Brexit. The pound has fallen due to the markets reacting to Brexit. That is true. But that is a double edged thing with some good effects, too. And frankly, I think money made in London is money also spent in London. I'm not too worried by the thought of banks putting some jobs overseas. HSBC were talking about doing that even before the Brexit vote. And generally the economy is doing okay at the moment, especially compared to economies elsewhere in the EU. The roof has most definitely not fallen in. If you want to say the future will be more gloomy, okay, you have a valid opinion. But so far things have not been all that bad.

Iassume when you talk about benefits of the £ crashing you mean helping exporters ... which unfortunately seems not to be happening
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36956418 (17 Jan 2017) wrote:Separate figures from the ONS showed the UK's current account deficit widened towards record levels in the third quarter, with few signs that the fall in the pound in the wake of the Brexit vote had helped to boost exports.


I feel that inflation is more than "up a tiny bit" - we are now at a 2 year high and that has happened over a very short period of time and is due to causes that mean the trend is likely to continue (i.e. not a "blip").
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/17/uk-inflation-now-its-the-pound-in-your-pocket-being-devalued (17 Jan 2017) wrote:UK inflation: now it's the pound in your pocket being devalued
The two-year window in which pay rises briefly outstripped inflation is well and truly over. Time to brace for higher prices and static wages


With regard to banking leaving the City, even the Brexit ideologists from Westminster are recognising the importance of keeping "the City" in London and have been maintaining that it would not not move overseas. Yet within days of Ms May opening her mouth again 4 announced significant moved out of London to EU countries (another saying how they already had EU subsidiary companies so were prepared).

Retail sales (that seemed to be keeping things looking better fueled by ever more borrowing) seemed to be
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38687686 (20 Jan 2017) wrote:Retail sales in December dropped 1.9% from the previous month, according to official figures.
Sales across all main retail sectors declined, with the heaviest falls coming at non-food stores, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.
It was the biggest monthly fall for more than four and a half years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/01/20/retail-sales-disappoint-december-prices-begin-climb/ (20 Jan 2017 wrote:Retail sales disappoint in December as prices begin to climb

The quantity of goods bought across the whole sector fell 1.9pc between November and December, far in excess of the 0.2pc pencilled in by forecasters and the biggest monthly fall since May 2011, according to the ONS.

And remember, Brexit has not even started yet.

Ian
blackbike
Posts: 2492
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 3:21pm

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by blackbike »

bovlomov wrote:By leaving the EU we are abandoning the racist immigration policy that favours white Europeans above the rest of the world. We can now have an immigration policy that treats all equally. (Have I got that right, blackbike?)

But
Britain will have to relax immigration rules for Australians if it wants to strike a free trade deal with the Commonwealth nation, its high commissioner to London has said.


If the UK strikes a load of new deals that favour the mostly rich, mostly white anglophones of the world, will that be an improvement on the current policy?



If you are going to strike agreements with other countries on trade and immigration it is best not to do it with poor countries which have lots of unemployed people and who are not important trade partners.

Our EU membership forced us to do exactly that, and as a consequence a large number of people came to the UK, nearly all of them white.

The choice to do that by Labour in 2004, which Jack Straw now calls a 'spectacular mistake', was probably the main contributory factor in our decision to vote to leave the EU.

Australia has very strict immigration rules for Brits. If we had a free trade deal with them then perhaps those would need to be relaxed too.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by bovlomov »

blackbike wrote:If you are going to strike agreements with other countries on trade and immigration it is best not to do it with poor countries which have lots of unemployed people and who are not important trade partners.

But it was you who introduced the problem.
That would increase fairness and end our effectively racially discriminatory EU-based immigration system which means we accept lots of people, nearly all white, from the EU's small population but don't accept proportionate numbers from the relatively huge number of mainly non-white people from the rest of the world.


I'm wondering (not rhetorically) whether a system that favours a group who are mostly white, because they are in Europe, is better or worse than favouring a group who are mostly white, because they are rich/anglophone/commonwealth etc.,
blackbike
Posts: 2492
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 3:21pm

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by blackbike »

bovlomov wrote:
I'm wondering (not rhetorically) whether a system that favours a group who are mostly white, because they are in Europe, is better or worse than favouring a group who are mostly white, because they are rich/anglophone/commonwealth etc.,


When we leave the EU we will be like most other countries in the world.

We will be able to decide our own immigration policy.

Our current, EU imposed immigration policy favours people from overwhelmingly white EU countries.

I haven't heard of any proposals for us to favour immigration from Commonwealth countries after we leave the EU.

But if we do then that will be our free choice, and as most people in the Commonwealth are not white such a policy would very probably mean a more diverse addition to our population than our current EU imposed immigration policy.

The EU is a protectionist bloc with strict trade and immigration rules which apply to 93% of the world's population, billions of people of all colours and creeds.

It is not a wonderful organisation which welcomes all and trades freely with everyone. Support for the EU does not make a person cosmopolitan and caring. It makes them the supporter of a self-interested bloc of nations which actively chooses to inhibit trade with and immigration from countries which contain the vast majority of people on the planet.
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by bovlomov »

blackbike wrote:When we leave the EU we will be like most other countries in the world.

We will be able to decide our own immigration policy.

Our current, EU imposed immigration policy favours people from overwhelmingly white EU countries.

I haven't heard of any proposals for us to favour immigration from Commonwealth countries after we leave the EU.

The whites versus non-whites issue is a red herring. You are confusing ethical arguments with financial ones.

EU immigration is mostly white - as is immigration from the richest countries. The whiteness is irrelevant to your argument, because you are making a financial case.
If you are going to strike agreements with other countries on trade and immigration it is best not to do it with poor countries which have lots of unemployed people and who are not important trade partners.


We won't be trading equally with everyone. We won't be allowing immigration equally. We may swap some trade and some immigration for other trade and immigration. That's what the discussion is about - and it's nothing to do with race or colour.

There is a case for an immigration policy based on other factors (development, social justice, multi-culturalism) rather than the short-term bottom line. Is that a case you would like to make?
blackbike
Posts: 2492
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 3:21pm

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by blackbike »

bovlomov wrote:
There is a case for an immigration policy based on other factors (development, social justice, multi-culturalism) rather than the short-term bottom line. Is that a case you would like to make?


As I said previously, it is best not to have immigration policies which let in lots of poor and unemployed people. That is what the EU's rules compel us to do.

When we leave the EU we will be able to decide on our own immigration policies, like most countries in the world already do.

Most countries in the world do not encourage immigration by poor and unemployed people, and I expect we will adopt a similar approach.

The EU strictly controls immigration from outside its borders precisely because it realises it is a necessity to protect jobs, welfare systems and the wider economy.

We are leaving the EU to give ourselves protection against immigration we don't need or want, just as the EU does against immigration it doesn't need or want.

We are often told immigration is a social, cultural and economic benefit. If that is the case why does the EU strictly control immigration from non-EU countries, and why do we rarely hear calls from 'liberals' for it to end these controls?
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by Psamathe »

blackbike wrote:
bovlomov wrote:
I'm wondering (not rhetorically) whether a system that favours a group who are mostly white, because they are in Europe, is better or worse than favouring a group who are mostly white, because they are rich/anglophone/commonwealth etc.,


When we leave the EU we will be like most other countries in the world.

We will be able to decide our own immigration policy.
....

I think the problem lies in our different understanding of "we". To me "we" means the EU (i.e. UK and it's neighbours working together towards a common goal, cooperating, etc.). You seem to have chosen a narrower definition. Then it would be equally valid for the Scots to use "we" as in Scotland and their "we" wants to stay members of the EU. But the "we" of Norfolk are fed-up with freedom of movement all those southerners from Essex invading our borders, providing cheap labour, etc.

I can see no reason why your definition is any more valid than mine or any more valid that Nicola Sturgeon's, etc.

Ian
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by mjr »

blackbike wrote:We will be able to decide our own immigration policy.....

We were already able to decide our own immigration policy, plus we decided our neighbours' immigration policy. Maybe after a few more years of six-figure immigration, you'll realise that it was mostly the UK government doing what business leaders want and applying pressure to keep on encouraging migrant workers to visit.

Psamathe wrote:But the "we" of Norfolk are fed-up with freedom of movement all those southerners from Essex invading our borders, providing cheap labour, etc.

The southerners are fine - they want even more money than we do. It's those blasted Tykes and Scots that cause us problems undercutting local settled labour, isn't it? ;)
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
blackbike
Posts: 2492
Joined: 11 Jul 2009, 3:21pm

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by blackbike »

mjr wrote:
We were already able to decide our own immigration policy, plus we decided our neighbours' immigration policy.


Yes.

Our government was part of the EU decision which meant that all Brits are free to emigrate to poor EU countries with high unemployment, and all people from those countries are free to come here.

Unsurprisingly we Brits voted to get out of such an arrangement as soon as nice Mr Farage gave us the opportunity to do so.

Contracts and agreements of all sorts tend to endure when they are mutually beneficial to all parties involved.
irc
Posts: 5192
Joined: 3 Dec 2008, 2:22pm
Location: glasgow

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by irc »

blackbike wrote:Our government was part of the EU decision which meant that all Brits are free to emigrate to poor EU countries with high unemployment, and all people from those countries are free to come here.

Unsurprisingly we Brits voted to get out of such an arrangement as soon as nice Mr Farage gave us the opportunity to do so.

Contracts and agreements of all sorts tend to endure when they are mutually beneficial to all parties involved.


You'll need to stop bringing facts and common sense to the table. :-)
User avatar
bovlomov
Posts: 4202
Joined: 5 Apr 2007, 7:45am
Contact:

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by bovlomov »

I'll assume that the 'white versus non-white immigration' issue has been dropped, and was grabbed in haste as a stick to beat the EU with. The argument only makes sense if one is proposing an immigration policy based on international equality rather than what's good for UKplc accounts.

Rather than contriving to divide us all by race, colour or religion, it might be better to ask why what's good for UKplc hasn't been good for many of its citizens. The answer to that is complex though, and while the EU has been partly responsible, the greater weight of blame can be laid at Westminster's door - and has happened with the full support of our Brexiting ministers.
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by Psamathe »

Oh dear, despite not having been asked, apparently we have voted against immigration (I remember an EU referendum but nothing asked about immigration).

And now
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-australia-india-tell-uk-relax-immigration-rules-free-trade-deal-eu-visa-restrictions-a7540036.html (22 Jan 2017) wrote:Two countries have already told the UK they must relax immigration rules if they want free trade

Australia and India both want a better visa deal for their citizens in exchange for a post-Brexit trade deal

Two countries have already told the UK that it must relax immigration rules if it wants a free trade deal after Brexit.

Australia's high commissioner to the UK, Alexander Downer, has echoed India’s calls for Theresa May to relax rules on visa restrictions on its citizens if she wants to form a lasting trading partnership outside the EU.


Ian
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by Cyril Haearn »

reohn2 wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:
mikeonabike wrote:Indeed, she thinks that other things are more important than close economic ties. Which is an opinion some of us agree with and others disagree. But she is the one who is proposing trade barriers as a consequence of her opinion.


I am sure I read that Mrs May wanted to stay but she abides by the will of the people and plans to take the UK out. I could not work for something I opposed, could you?

You're forgetting,she's a Tory politrickian,perfect credentials doing anything so long as it pays,principals don't enter into it.


A person crossing Westminster Bridge was held up by an armed man.

- Give me all your money!

- But I am an MP!

- Sorry, I mean: give me all my money!
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: 'Brexit means Brexit' ... ** The Brexit Thread **

Post by mercalia »

atleast one main stream EU politician thinks that the obsession with the blunt and simple idea of freedom of movement of labour is a stupid and anachronistic idea that needs to be re thought --

"Europe’s promise was to make social progress possible for everyone, with decent jobs that are being valued with decent wages. Nonetheless, for many Europeans, labour migration nowadays leads to lower wages and unemployment. Because of the European directives about the posting of workers, to many the free movement of workers equals unfair competition on the labour market. This has to stop"


if the EU had politicians like that there would be no need for Brexit?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/22/europe-needs-refashioning-brexit-taxation-migration?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=209622&subid=7646217&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

cant help by wonder why Merkel and Hollande havent got that sense. cant help but think that their countries in some way benefit at the expense of others? or maybe they are just not that bright really with their heads buried in the past and the sand?
Last edited by mercalia on 22 Jan 2017, 5:44pm, edited 3 times in total.
Locked