The new EU policy

[I1L2T3]

Before the election we had pro EU parties having the policy of renegotiate, but stay in; it now seems that the Conservative have that policy too. Very disingenuous. Or have I got that wrong?

 

Nope you got it right.

 

And for once I'm not going to slag the Tories off. They said all along they would negotiate. It's clear that most of their backers from big business want to stay in the EU. The US wants us to stay in. The EU wants us to stay in. It is clear Tory policy to stay in on renegotiated terms.

 

They may not have explicitly stated that they will launch a vociferous referendum campaign to stay in the EU, and they may not have been explicit about what they meant regarding the terms of the in/out referendum but for once they didn't hide anything - the dots were there to be joined up but most of the electorate is too dumb to do so.

Edited June 8, 2015 by I1L2T3

[El Cid]

 

Your turn now: let's have some evidence of LibDem support for renegotiation with the EU and pro-referendum, pre-2010. In fact, make that pre-2013.

 

I dont think that they ever supported the referendum, but even the Greens wanted reform, its just a matter of what they want reforming is all blurred, same with the Tories.

All the parties say that EU workers are a positive for the economy, so really they want to let them in, they just dont want to say it out loud.

[L00b]

I dont think that they ever supported the referendum, but even the Greens wanted reform, its just a matter of what they want reforming is all blurred, same with the Tories.

If I can find out what Cameron is shooting for, it can't be that hard for most others, including you. See my 12:07 post.

All the parties say that EU workers are a positive for the economy, so really they want to let them in, they just dont want to say it out loud.

Why does everything always have to be so effin' black and white on here all the time?

 

All the parties know that EU economic migrants have a multiplying and synergistic for the UK economy, and account for a non-trivial part of the recovery since 2010.

 

It's basic competitive economics: we have the place, reputation and opportunities to attract the best and brightest, they come and do what they do best, we get the economic activity and tax take, the rest of the EU cry in their soup. Boohoo them, lucky us.

 

Unfortunately, that's putting a few domestic noses out of joint, because we don't live in a utopia wherein anyone and everyone understand macro and micro economics, all the way down to how it impacts their personal circumstances. It's the kind of noses attracted by nationalistic "cos dem furreiners are nicking our jobs an our wimmin" rethoric, who are frequently the uncompetitive type in the jobs market associated with the recovering and motoring economy that pays their tax credit and HB.

 

Omelettes. Still can't get them made without breaking some eggs.

 

Now, take the UK out of the EU and extend the current Australia-like PBS introduced by Labour in 2009 to EU nationals, and we'll get less of them. Unsurprisingly. So long as the domestic supply matches the loss in both quantity and quality and takes the jobs on the same terms, no problems. If it doesn't, however, you'll get loss of economic activity, productivity and competitivity.

[loraward]

If I can find out what Cameron is shooting for, it can't be that hard for most others, including you. See my 12:07 post.

Why does everything always have to be so effin' black and white on here all the time?

 

All the parties know that EU economic migrants have a multiplying and synergistic for the UK economy, and account for a non-trivial part of the recovery since 2010.

 

It's basic competitive economics: we have the place, reputation and opportunities to attract the best and brightest, they come and do what they do best, we get the economic activity and tax take, the rest of the EU cry in their soup. Boohoo them, lucky us.

 

Unfortunately, that's putting a few domestic noses out of joint, because we don't live in a utopia wherein anyone and everyone understand macro and micro economics, all the way down to how it impacts their personal circumstances. It's the kind of noses attracted by nationalistic "cos dem furreiners are nicking our jobs an our wimmin" rethoric, who are frequently the uncompetitive type in the jobs market associated with the recovering and motoring economy that pays their tax credit and HB.

 

Omelettes. Still can't get them made without breaking some eggs.

 

Now, take the UK out of the EU and extend the current Australia-like PBS introduced by Labour in 2009 to EU nationals, and we'll get less of them. Unsurprisingly. So long as the domestic supply matches the loss in both quantity and quality and takes the jobs on the same terms, no problems. If it doesn't, however, you'll get loss of economic activity, productivity and competitivity.

 

 

The flaw in that argument is that many of the people opposed to EU membership and immigration do understand macro and micro economics, do understand the benefits of immigration, but they also understand the negative consequences of EU membership and immigration, and are of the opinion that the negative out ways the posative.

[El Cid]

 

All the parties know that EU economic migrants have a multiplying and synergistic for the UK economy, and account for a non-trivial part of the recovery since 2010.

 

It's basic competitive economics: we have the place, reputation and opportunities to attract the best and brightest, they come and do what they do best, we get the economic activity and tax take, the rest of the EU cry in their soup. Boohoo them, lucky us.

 

Unfortunately, that's putting a few domestic noses out of joint.

 

What does a growing economy do for you?

 

It does not make YOU richer or happier; its just the size of the economy, it does not affect our poor productivity levels.

 

A growing economy without more houses and infrastructure does put peoples noses out, but having a Tory press does help the facts.

 

How are we doing on the happiness index, David Cameron brought that in, in the last Parliament.

[JFKvsNixon]

What does a growing economy do for you?

 

It does not make YOU richer or happier; its just the size of the economy, it does not affect our poor productivity levels.

 

A growing economy without more houses and infrastructure does put peoples noses out, but having a Tory press does help the facts.

 

How are we doing on the happiness index, David Cameron brought that in, in the last Parliament.

 

A growing economy gives the government the opportunity to cut taxes and/or improve services and/or invest in the country.

[El Cid]

A growing economy gives the government the opportunity to cut taxes and/or improve services and/or invest in the country.

 

But they dont do it.

 

A growing population needs more houses, roads, hospitals, it still does not improve peoples lives.

[JFKvsNixon]

But they dont do it.

 

A growing population needs more houses, roads, hospitals, it still does not improve peoples lives.

 

Yes they do, the countries standard of living has increased.

[El Cid]

Yes they do, the countries standard of living has increased.

 

You mean the standard of living of the rich?

[JFKvsNixon]

You mean the standard of living of the rich?

 

No I'd say our working class is better off as well.