The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting

[tinfoilhat]

6 minutes ago, *_ash_* said:

 

 

*eugh* can't sort quotes out easily, sorry to all 3 quoted members... I'll have to type out instead...

 

I think Anna makes a valid point.

 

Magilla: yes he is UK citizen, but still has huge influence (goodness knows why though) - so I think we should openly criticise people if want

 

RJBJ: I would argue (and always have) that its HIS policies when in government that ultimately brought us to this position.

This springs to minds: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/mar/24/how-immigration-came-to-haunt-labour-inside-story

 

I also blame his government for his dereg of gambling, which has brought our cities to just charity shops and betting shops next door.

 

 

@Anna B

@RJRB

@Magilla

This is worth highlighting. If Blair had handled EU immigration better back in 04/05 we wouldn't be where we are now.

 

Be nice if he would admit that!

[*_ash_*]

Just now, tinfoilhat said:

This is worth highlighting. If Blair had handled EU immigration better back in 04/05 we wouldn't be where we are now.

 

Be nice if he would admit that!

Not a chance.

 

Even quoting the guardian and not the rags that the posters above are ranting about, they even won't admit this. We're all racist thickos and Top cats post sums up remainers opinions on brexiteers. No one argues with him/her on that side.

 

If we had a Delorean and altered his decision on immediate work rights, this forum would have at least 5 fewer threads, IMO. Everything goes back to this decision, IMO.

[BrexitGuy]

1 minute ago, tinfoilhat said:

This is worth highlighting. If Blair had handled EU immigration better back in 04/05 we wouldn't be where we are now.

 

Be nice if he would admit that!

It's fair to say that Blair would have been encouraged to handle immigration by our unelected friends in Brussels. As published in the telegraph, each and every member is given a specific number or for want of a better word,  allocation of people, based on monetary factors, birth  and death rates and the preceding years GDP amongst other things. Despite me personally not liking Blair for dragging us into the Gulf, it's clear that any UK prime minister will take the brunt of recommendation from across the water. 

 

[Top Cats Hat]

1 minute ago, *_ash_* said:

If we had a Delorean and altered his decision on immediate work rights, this forum would have at least 5 fewer threads, IMO. Everything goes back to this decision, IMO.

The €urosceptic wing of the Tory party and thr far right predate the Blair government by decades.

[tinfoilhat]

13 minutes ago, BrexitGuy said:

It's fair to say that Blair would have been encouraged to handle immigration by our unelected friends in Brussels. As published in the telegraph, each and every member is given a specific number or for want of a better word,  allocation of people, based on monetary factors, birth  and death rates and the preceding years GDP amongst other things. Despite me personally not liking Blair for dragging us into the Gulf, it's clear that any UK prime minister will take the brunt of recommendation from across the water. 

 

Interesting. So why did other countries handle it differently (ie better) than us then? Were they all in on it?

14 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

The €urosceptic wing of the Tory party and thr far right predate the Blair government by decades.

No, Blair was in charge with a big fat majority. Now unless he was taking orders directly from the Tory eurosceptic right, the buck stops with him. It’s places like Clacton, rural lincs etc that had almost zero immigration for decades that had to handle foreigners in large numbers amongst them for possibly the first time since the war. It was a big change and they didn’t like it. Couple that with the crash of 08 and here we are.

[*_ash_*]

7 minutes ago, Top Cats Hat said:

The €urosceptic wing of the Tory party and thr far right predate the Blair government by decades.

So do Labour eurosceptics. And so do far-left wings of society.

 

The far right and far left are probably equal in number, and generally balance each other out in votes (if not more far-left than far-right, but unlike you, I will admit this is a guess rather than something I can prove).

 

I know I'm uneducated and read suns and mails (your generalisations), but in every election I try and educate people that these type of votes aren't worth politicians time... this thread is a perfect example...

 

Even if I spent the next 20 years trying to convince you to vote brexit in the next People's Vote, you won't. I bet I couldn't even buy your vote for a couple of hundred quid (which is about the most I could afford if I wanted to prove a point)

 

I generally use USA to example this, as it's a bit like our politics, but slightly worse (if that's possible) - some states are set in stone (some consituencies here are set in stone) - so the parties don't go there... they look for close places, and shout and scream there instead.

 

-

 

Example

 

A vote for something:

 

For ease of figures, let's say they are 100 voters

 

5 are open racists

10 are closet ones

5 are open communists

10 are socialists

 

they balance each other out, as all will vote one way or other, regardless of campaigns. These votes (granted I being a bit vague with groups, but I know you prefer percentages, so kept it to 100.

 

50 will vote the way of their favoured party, (in case of brexit this was a bit split, but usually in elections these are also considered into predictions.

10 will vote as their parents vote

 

That leaves 10 who are targets.

 

Thousands of posts and arguments about it won't change this fact.

 

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

 

No, Blair was in charge with a big fat majority. Now unless he was taking orders directly from the Tory eurosceptic right, the buck stops with him. It’s places like Clacton, rural lincs etc that had almost zero immigration for decades that had to handle foreigners in large numbers amongst them for possibly the first time since the war. It was a big change and they didn’t like it. Couple that with the crash of 08 and here we are.

I entirely agree with this.

[lottiecass]

9 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

Interesting. So why did other countries handle it differently (ie better) than us then? Were they all in on it?

No, Blair was in charge with a big fat majority. Now unless he was taking orders directly from the Tory eurosceptic right, the buck stops with him. It’s places like Clacton, rural lincs etc that had almost zero immigration for decades that had to handle foreigners in large numbers amongst them for possibly the first time since the war. It was a big change and they didn’t like it. Couple that with the crash of 08 and here we are.

Of course you're right TF, why he's given a platform ? anyone who takes any notice of him needs help.

[andyofborg]

1 hour ago, lottiecass said:

Of course you're right TF, why he's given a platform ? anyone who takes any notice of him needs help.

He says some sensible things and he is the most successful prime minister labour has ever had and one of the must successful from any party in the 20th century. 

 

With regard to immigration, the government of that time decided not to implement the full range of controls which were available to it following the accession of the eastern european states to the EU. In reality this follows the pattern where all governments have declined to use the powers they have to exercise control over EU citizens seeking to make a life for themselves and their families in the UK.

 

 

[Top Cats Hat]

18 hours ago, *_ash_* said:

Even if I spent the next 20 years trying to convince you to vote brexit in the next People's Vote, you won't. I bet I couldn't even buy your vote for a couple of hundred quid (which is about the most I could afford if I wanted to prove a point)

First of all, you couldn't buy my vote for a couple of hundred quid as Brexit has already cost me nearly £6,000 in lost dollar and €uro savings and is likely to cost me much more in the years ahead as most of my work is outside the UK.

 

The main reason why I would never vote for Brexit is because the four major grounds for leaving the EU do not persuade me in the slightest that we would be better off outside.

 

1. Immigration.

 

I've never had a problem with it. This country is built on immigration and immigrants are a net benefit to our economy. I work more outside the UK than in it, particularly in Europe so I'm not really in a position to moan about freedom of movement. I've also benefitted massively from various EU hospitals particularly the excellent French health service so again, I'm in no position to complain about EU citizens using our facilities.

 

2. Sovereignty.

 

Anyone who lives in a country with an unelected head of state and an unelected second chamber of Parliament then complains about the EU, where at least we have an equal vote, needs their head looking at.

 

3. EU contribution.

 

Membership of the EU is of enormous economic benefit to the UK and the £8.6 billion we contribute each year represents great value for money. With the rebate, we have pretty much the best deal of any EU member state. It also represents a fraction of one percent of our GDP so those who talk of 'huge amounts' of money sent to Brussells every year need to brush up on their maths!

 

4. EU bureaucracy

 

The EU is overbureacratic and this needs to be dealt with but we don't need to leave because of it. We actually need to stop acting like adolescent outsiders and play a full grown up role in all EU decision making. So many Leave supporters on here keep referring to the EU as 'them' rather than 'us' which gives the game away a bit. They either they don't actually understand what the EU is, or they see Europe as 'foreign'.

 

If anyone has any other more convincing arguments in favour of leaving the EU, I'd love to hear them. 😀

 

 

[OPEN BORDERS]

2 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

First of all, you couldn't buy my vote for a couple of hundred quid as Brexit has already cost me nearly £6,000 in lost dollar and €uro savings and is likely to cost me much more in the years ahead as most of my work is outside the UK.

 

The main reason why I would never vote for Brexit is because the four major grounds for leaving the EU do not persuade me in the slightest that we would be better off outside.

 

1. Immigration.

 

I've never had a problem with it. This country is built on immigration and immigrants are a net benefit to our economy. I work more outside the UK than in it, particularly in Europe so I'm not really in a position to moan about freedom of movement. I've also benefitted massively from various EU hospitals particularly the excellent French health service so again, I'm in no position to complain about EU citizens using our facilities.

 

2. Sovereignty.

 

Anyone who lives in a country with an unelected head of state and an unelected second chamber of Parliament then complains about the EU, where at least we have an equal vote, needs their head looking at.

 

3. EU contribution.

 

Membership of the EU is of enormous economic benefit to the UK and the £8.6 billion we contribute each year represents great value for money. With the rebate, we have pretty much the best deal of any EU member state. It also represents a fraction of one percent of our GDP so those who talk of 'huge amounts' of money sent to Brussells every year need to brush up on their maths!

 

4. EU bureaucracy

 

The EU is overbureacratic and this needs to be dealt with but we don't need to leave because of it. We actually need to stop acting like adolescent outsiders and play a full grown up role in all EU decision making. So many Leave supporters on here keep referring to the EU as 'them' rather than 'us' which gives the game away a bit. They either they don't actually understand what the EU is, or they see Europe as 'foreign'.

 

If anyone has any other more convincing arguments in favour of leaving the EU, I'd love to hear them. 😀

 

 

To get out before the EU self destructs.