The end of the world is nigh.

[monkey104]

Thanks loob. You have made my mind up.

[carosio]

What visa?

 

You can move to Spain now, and claim unemployment benefit if you are unemployed. A Spaniard can move here and do the same (although isn't there now a 4 year period before they can claim?)

 

That is, the visa they would require if and when we leave.

[I1L2T3]

See, that wasn't difficult

 

So, you've proved that Lichtenstein indeed only grants very few residency permits every year, 87 in all. Fair cop. The info I had on the term of the Protocol 15 (Article 5–7) of the EEA agreement and its prorogation was manifestly wrong (..though not the immigration stats).

 

And a neighbouring page of your links proves my counter-point, in that there is no restriction at all placed on Swiss EEA commuter workers (completely free movement) and only a marginal admin step for other EEA commuter workers (registration by employer: no different to all other EU member states, e.g. in the UK registering with HMRC for an NI number).

 

No restrictions at all on normal travel (leisure, tourism, passing-through) for any EEA person (Lichtenstein is in Schengen, btw).

 

Conclusion: Lichtenstein is no more able to "restrict the free movement of people from within the EU despite being a European Free Trade Association" than Switzerland or Norway (who both also require residency permits), but it is unsurprisingly more restrictive about gaining a right of residency in volume terms. Completely as expected: it's less than half the size of Sheffield.

 

It's got a population of < 30,000. There is limited space because much of it is mountainous. The bits that aren't mountainous are agricultural land, and there is a small amount of urban development. There is not much point really in trying to reside there unless you are originally from there. Chur and Feldkirch are viable places to commute from and especially on the Austrian side are comparatively cheap to live in. Leichtenstein is 5 miles wide. You can drive straight in and out the other side in well under 30 minutes, from Austria to Switzerland with virtually no border controls

 

I know the area very well. I've skied many times on the Austrian side, mainly in Montafon, and in Switzerland at Flumserberg above the stunning Walsee, above the city of Chur and at Flims, and even in Liechtenstein itself at Malbun. Friends of mine lived in Zurich for years, and just over the German border.

 

Liechtenstein is not a model for the UK. It is geographically very small with a tiny population, it is very mountainous, it is massively entwined economically with both Austria and Switzerland with a commuter belt in both those of countries.

Edited March 30, 2016 by I1L2T3

[sutty27]

It's got a population of < 30,000. There is limited space because much of it is mountainous. The bits that aren't mountainous are agricultural land, and there is a small amount of urban development.

 

Liechtenstein is not a model for the UK. It is geographically very small with a tiny population, it is very mountainous, it is massively entwined economically with both Austria and Switzerland with a commuter belt in both those of countries.

 

Much of the UK is area of natural beauty, mountainous, woodland and farmland, with some urban areas, we have less space per head of population than Liechtenstein, so why in your opinion should their land be preserved whilst our land should be built over. If Liechtenstein can be part of the free trade area but still opt out of in the EU immigration policy, then we can.

[tzijlstra]

Much of the UK is area of natural beauty, mountainous, woodland and farmland, with some urban areas, we have less space per head of population than Liechtenstein, so why in your opinion should their land be preserved whilst our land should be built over. If Liechtenstein can be part of the free trade area but still opt out of in the EU immigration policy, then we can.

 

Don't be daft. Posts like this really show a confused mind at work. There is plenty of space in the UK, the reality is that the UKs population averages are massively distorted due to London and its commuter belt.

 

Statements like the one you make are completely disingenuous and show that your little Englander mentality 'England ist voll!' is merely an excuse.

 

It also shows you've never driven to Doncaster on the M18 or through the Dearne Valley, want to see where you can put more people? Have a try at that.

[sutty27]

Don't be daft. Posts like this really show a confused mind at work. There is plenty of space in the UK, the reality is that the UKs population averages are massively distorted due to London and its commuter belt.

 

Statements like the one you make are completely disingenuous and show that your little Englander mentality 'England ist voll!' is merely an excuse.

 

It also shows you've never driven to Doncaster on the M18 or through the Dearne Valley, want to see where you can put more people? Have a try at that.

 

No it shows a mind that is open and not constrained by the box.

 

The UK is already over populated, more people will require more farm land, more energy production, more water, so when you are out looking for land that can accommodate more houses you should be looking for land that can be cultivated, all of which needs to be achieved without affecting Britains biodiversity.

 

There is significantly more land available for housing in the rest of Europe because it is significantly less populated.

 

You may not want to preserve the beauty of England's country side for future generation but I do.

[Cyclone]

You should go and ask the help desk, I tried but it didn't work.

 

End of discussion on this because that will also likely result in ban.

 

I just felt that it is important that you know that I am willing to post evidence which supports my position but I am not permitted.

 

If you've got links to the BBC that you aren't 'allowed' to post, PM them to me and I'll post them.

I suspect that no link to the BBC has ever had anyone banned from the forum and I'll take the risk.

 

---------- Post added 30-03-2016 at 08:45 ----------

 

 

What conclusion are you questioning?

 

Are you having to ask that because you don't know what you've been posting?

 

---------- Post added 30-03-2016 at 08:46 ----------

 

 

We ARE Great Britain, vote out to keep it that way, we are not a subsidiary of a German Europe.

 

Angel1.

 

Perhaps Germany should be a subsidiary of British Europe, if you must frame things that way.

We can either be part of what is effectively a super power, or not. I'd rather be part.

[I1L2T3]

Much of the UK is area of natural beauty, mountainous, woodland and farmland, with some urban areas, we have less space per head of population than Liechtenstein, so why in your opinion should their land be preserved whilst our land should be built over. If Liechtenstein can be part of the free trade area but still opt out of in the EU immigration policy, then we can.

 

No land is preserved there. There is quite simply nowhere else for them to build. They have Alpine mountains and foothills over much of the country, a few small towns, and agricultural land which is basically a flood plain for the river Rhine.

 

Stop trying to compare the UK with Liechtenstein. It's daft.

[sutty27]

If you've got links to the BBC that you aren't 'allowed' to post, PM them to me and I'll post them.

I suspect that no link to the BBC has ever had anyone banned from the forum and I'll take the risk.

 

---------- Post added 30-03-2016 at 08:45 ----------

 

 

Are you having to ask that because you don't know what you've been posting?

 

Suspect what you like, they were posted, seen by others and then deleted because they proved the point I made and don't intend looking for them again.

[Cyclone]

I don't think many Bexit supporters want to stop people coming on holiday to the UK, residency is the issue and Lichtenstein is able to restrict residency.

With a population density half that of England.

 

Isn't it a common argument that the UK can't stop criminals and potential terrorists from visiting as tourists? Because I've seen that argument made, and it doesn't appear that it will be the case.

 

---------- Post added 30-03-2016 at 08:49 ----------

 

Suspect what you like, they were posted, seen by others and then deleted because they proved the point I made and don't intend looking for them again.

 

You don't have them in your browser history?